H J 

609 

M3 




N. 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.! 



Chap.Ji 



Shelf 



\3 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 




JL^S^H^ 



TO 



HIS EXCELLENCY 



DANIEL D. TOMPKINS, 



LATE GOVERNOR 



OF THE 



HPAWiR ©» raw«T®B3L 



ALBANY : 
PRINTED BY E. & E. HOSFORD, 100 STATESfrREET. 

1820. 



1 * 



LETTER, #c. 



blR, 



State of New-York, Comptroller's Office, 

Albany, December 13, 1819. 



My answer to your letter of the 30th of October last, has 
been prepared with as much expedition as my numerous official du- 
ties would permit. 

Deeply as j regret the necessity of again appearing befbr 
public in this unpleasant controversy, I am constrained to do it, art, 
only injustice to my own character, but in vindication of that of 
state, which I think is -vitally concerned. In order to maintain your- 
self in the unjust ground you have taken in respect to your claims 
under the act of the last session of the legislature, and to convince the 
people that you are not a public defaulter, you have resorted to the 
only means left you—misrepresentation and sophistry : and to effect 
your object with the greater certainty, you have deemed it necessa- 
ry to destroy, as far as in your power, my reputation as a man and a 
public officer, and under the influence of feelings of disappointed cu- 
pidity, you have given vent to the most unjust and cruei calumnies 



against me. 



Bid you reflect that you were attempting to destroy a man who 
had never injured you, unless you consider it°an injury that I should 
h?*ve had the hardihood to prevent your taking out. of the public 
treasury an immense fortune, to which you had no possible right, as 
I could conceive, either in law or equity ? Or, reflecting, did you. 
disregard this, as unworthy of your notice ? Did you supp ose tna * 
your story was woven with so much art and dextep*/> that no dis- 
cernment could ever unravel it ? That you had <*>mpl«tely succeed- 
ed in veiling the true state of your account*, and in permanently 
blinding the eyes of the community ? Or did you persuade yourself 
that your eloquence, your sophistry, and pathetic appeal to the pub- 
lic Sympathy, and your attack o(i me, would appal and confound 
me ? If you thought so, you <tiisealculated most egregiously : For I 
am not to be intimidated fr-Jin performing the duty I owe to the pub-i 
lie and to myself, by tb*5 calumnies or denunciations of any man, ok 
set of men; and kV support in the discharge of this duty, I rely, 
with confidence, on an enlightened and candid people. 

I cannot indeed aspire to rival you in the arts of an able writer. 
J. have no eloquence to dazzle and mislead the public judgment. I 
aim only at a plain and distinct statement of facts : if I am understood, 
it is all I desire. I intend to rely entirely on documentary proof, as 
far as it can be obtained ; and where I may not have it in my power 
to controvert assertions made by you, which are unfounded in fact, 
except by my own decfarations,the point must rest upon our respect- 
ive veracity. And in estimating this, the public will not forget that 
1 have no personal interest in this controversy. I have no money at 
stake ; I have no ulterior views to promote : I am acting as a public 
officer placed as a centinel on the public treasury. I shall lose no- 
thing if you ultimately obtain from that treasury the enormoas sum 
for which you are contending. 



Do you stand in the same disinterested situation ? Are you influen- 
ced by no private and personal interest ? Are you not to be greatly 
enriched, if the result of this contest shall be as you wish and in- 
tend ? Are you not, in one word, a witness in your own cause, deep- 
ly interested, and even incompetent by all the ordinary rules of ev- 
idence ? Be assured, sir, that if our respective claims to credibility 
must be contrasted, these considerations will not be overlooked. 

You have thought it expedient in the course of your letter, to en- 
ter into a detail of your services during the war ; a detail, which 
you seem to apprehend may be considered by some " ostentatious," 
and which must be acknowledged by all to be wholly irrelevant. 
Your services, however much demanded of you by your official sta- 
tion, and however important and efficient, can, in no sense, illustrate 
the justice of your claims, under a law of the state. — However much 
they may have influenced the legislature in enacting the law, you 
must be sensible that they ought not to influence me as a public offi- 
cer in executing it, or the public in judging of the fairness and cor- 
rectness of my conduct, and of the real merits of the question in 
dispute between us. If, therefore, you had intended to rely only on 
an appeal to the cool and candid judgment of the public, you would 
have omitted this display of your own uncommon merits, and would 
have contented yourself with discussing the merits of your claims: 
you would not have attempted to enlist in your favour, the feelings 
of the community, and to withdraw their attention from the true 
points of the controversy. That this attempt will fail, I have no doubt. 
The people will consider this subject coolly and deliberately. They 
are too much interested in it to be inattentive or careless, or to be 
led away by any excitement which you may labour to produce. 

Since the negotiation between us for the adjustment of your ac- 
counts was finally broken off; in your publication at that period ; and 
1n your letter which I am now answering, you have assiduously la- 
boured to fix on me the charge oC injustice towards you, of having 
long been actuated by a design to oppress and injure you : of know- 
ingly violating my official duty-, of carelessness with respect to your 
vouchers; nay, of the intentional oppression of them ; of design- 
edly throwing your accounts into confusio U? -with the view to embar- 
rass and prevent their final settlement ; and indeed of being guilty of 
almost every kind of official misconduct in relation to you. As far 
as these serious charges against my official and private character are 
attempted to be supported by specific proofs, they will be made the 
subject of examination hereafter. As often as you deal ui general 
terms of accusation and reproach, (of which your letter is full) I must 
meet them again as I have heretofore done, with a solemn denial. I 
know and feel that the whole of my conduct towards you has man- 
ifested a forbearance which has been pushed to the utmost verge of 
my official duty. I will not here republish the letters formerly ad- 
dressed to you, soliciting, and even entreatiug you, for the sake of 
your own reputation, to attend to the adjustment of your accounts; 
and to save me from the censure which I was in danger of incurring,. 



.5 



1>y the long indulgence which I had granted you. These letters are 
before the public. . But I am now enabled to refer to your own opin- 
ion as evidence of the correctness of my official conduct ; and I in- 
vite your attention to the dilemma in which you appear to be placed. 

If I had been guilty of all the various acts of injustice with which 
you charge me : If I had long since formed the design to oppress and 
injure you : if I had lost or suppressed your vouchors r if i had de- 
signedly confused your accounts, with a view to embarrass their set- 
tlement, all these things must have Men well known to you, previous to 
the meeting of the joint committee of the legislature, of which Col. 
Davis was Chairman. And indeed, you now say, that you had long 
submitted in silence, and without complaint, to my unjust and oppres- 
sive conduct.-^If these things were true, as you now assert them to be, 
it must be clear that I was an unfaithful and even a corrupt officer; 
and that you knew rne to be so — And yet before that joint committee 
you took occasion repeatedly, and with the utmost apparent sincerity, 
to declare, that you did not implicate me, or any one in my office, in 
the alleged loss of your vouchers ; " and you spoke of my official con- 
duct in terms of very high commendation." Not only of my general 
official conduct and character? did you thus speak ; but you never in 
the presence of that committee, spoke of my conduct in the transactions 
with you, otherwise than with respect and confidence.* Now, sir, I had 
at that moment, if ever, been guilty of most of the acts of injustice 
and official misconduct towards you of which you now complain, and 
to which you say you have long submitted $ and which of course you 
must have then felt and known. If I had been thus guilty, what 
ought to be said of the hypocrisy, nay of the falsehood of your public 
declarations of the purity of my official conduct ? And if I had not 
been thus guilty ; if you spoke the truth when you spoke of my offi- 
cial conduct towards you in these very transactions, "with respect 
and confidence, and in terms of very high commendation," what 
ought I to say of your attempt now to destroy my official, nay, my 
private character, by charging me with injustice and oppression ? In 
which of these statements do you expect to be believed ? Both can- 
not be true. You stand self contradicted. 

Sir, you spoke as you thought and felt, when you spoke of me to 
the comrnittee, " with respect and confidence." You had no motive 
then to injure me : to endeavour to brake down the public confidence 
in my honour and veracity ; to discredit my official statements, and 
by destroying me to open the way to the ultimate attainment of your 
►objects. 

-On the subject of the general spirit and temper of my conduct to- 
wards you, I must also refer you to th£ concluding paragraph of the 
letter of Col. Davis, in the appendix. He says, that during my whole 
intercourse with him on the subject of your accounts, my "conduct 
was marked throughout by a delicate and scrupulous regard to your 
character and feelings, and that I cautiously avoided any thing offen- 
sive to your feelings or prejudicial to your claims." Surely, sir, if I 

* See the letters ef Mr. Bacon and Col. Davis, in the Appendix, marked (B & C.) 



.had been actuated towards you by the motives which you now attri* 
bute to me, those motives would have influenced me in my interviews 
with Col. Davis, who, you say, St has always been ardently opposed 
to you in his political feelings," and was " in some degree, pei haps, 
influenced by those feelings in instituting an enquiry into your ac- 
counts." if so, he would not have received unfavourably any sugges- 
tions from me, " prejudicial to your claims." Yet, in all my inter- 
course with him, I was "delicate and scrupulous," in relation to 
your " character and feeelings." * It gives me great pleasure, in ad- 
dition to your own solemn acknowledgments of the fairness and up- 
rightness of my official conduct, to refer to the opinion of Col. Davis, 
to whose candour and integrity, all who know him will unite with 
you in bearing testimony. 

Among the specific acts of injustice towards you, which you have 
alleged, is the rule adopted by me of holding you accountable for the 
faithful expenditure of all the monies drawn from the treasury, on 
your order, by subordinate agents of the government. You say that 
" you protested against this practice in the early part of your admi- 
nistration." 

In answer I remark, that I have no recollection that you ever pro- 
tested against it. But even if you had, I could not without a law 
have altered it. This practice was in force when 1 came into office, 
and I continued it, because I found it established, and because I 
thought it a salutary rule, that the agent to whom, or to whose order 
money was directed to be paid, should be held accountable for its 
faithful expenditure. It is reasonable to suppose that under these 
circumstances he would be vigilant in calling to account the subordi- 
nate agents to whom he might advance the money. The appropri- 
ations which have at various times been made for the improvement 
of the navigation of the Hudson river, for opening and making of 
roads, for the building of bridges, for the expense of the commissary's 
department, and in. short, all appropriations for public objects, have 
been paid to the commissioners or persons named in the law, and 
these persons, have been held accountable for their faithful and final 
expenditure. In cases where advances have been made from time to 
time by these persons to their subordinate officers, they have never 
received credit for such advances, until it was shown by proper vouch- 
ers that the money was actually expended for the purposes for which 
it was appropriated, except in cases specially provided for by law. 
This practice having been uniform, and well known to the legislature, 
I cannot see any reason why it should be departed from when you 
are the agent receiving money at the treasury. If it be a hard and 
unjust rule, the legislature has the power of altering it : but I could 
not take it upon myself to depart from established forms without le- 
gislative sanction. It is clear therefore that I am in no way to blame 
for the course which I have pursued in this business ; and that it could 
not be expected 1 should relinquish the fixed practice in favour of you 
or any other person. 

But even if it had been otherwise ; if it had been the custom of the 



office to pass all advances to the credil of the person makine- them I 
cou d not have applied it to your case. On eSng Th warm I, 

lime as a mere messenger to brim? you the money and S ,i 

too absurd to contend for a moment tha when the cashier of a 1 ' 

ry it to you, it ought to be charged to such aoUf Thie t * 

for the reasons which I have before stated S C0U ' d " 0t do 

tofh^„ S dTai. S rh7d^nt 1 l e no° 1 re Par, '' CU,a '; °» '"'^ead, and 
.he offieersauo iSfflftSSSSST ftEgSftSS? ? 

of one m,ll lon of dollars which has been chafed to me i„ fi," pWanb 

*3fis& si ^ girxriSr a ** 

"through my hands " J ' d has wmr i 7 ^^ 

onSSert , le^Lt^? aD ^ pur oXTv-ere drawn 
pen*., & c.) ZZ^ SKfe "fc °^o„,i„ f nt ex- 
1819, page 460 to 468.) "*^ -,7*^ ^ e Assei »l>ly Journal, 

as InDeaibv "hi 8 "^ Paid al ,he treasur y *> ^ &W** person, 
^appears by thetr receipts to the warrants now on file i„ fhfs office', 

To yourself, 

Aaron Clark, do * 9.00O. 

John McLean, jr. do ' 33.530. 




4.500. 

362.121.40 

189.500.00 

11*00 0.0Q 



^ r t 2.000.00 

Isaac Q- Leake, 10.000. 
Elisha Jenkins, 750. 

William James, 10.50o! 

I. & J. Townsend, 2.702*. 

Vinal Luce, ■ 3.111.59 

I. W* Livingston,, 1.791.39 
Richard Winslow, * 550 | 

Russel Attwater;, 5.000*. 

Josiah Masters, 5.00o! 

Smith Cogswell, 2 OOo! 
Lemuel Pomeroy, ' 

953.387.53 
To persons who w«re known, or supposed, to be officers 

for the expenditure of public money, viz : 
Samuel Edmonds, paymaster, 50 .000. 

Richard Piatt, commissary, 6.000. 

HartMassey, -75°* 

Isaac Denniston, .^JJJf' 

William Carpender, 5 two. 

J ohn McLean, commissary, 25.500. oj.w 

$1,042,637-53 
From this it appears that you received either in person a t the trea- 
sury or bv your agents authorized to receive for you, but not to ex- 
™d H the sum of S95S.S87.53, and that the residue of the amount 
Saied to ySWnf 88M«> ™ P aid to 0ther P 8 " 01 " by y0Ur * 

' de Now it is worthy of remark, that with one exception, of which I 

sh^spea^pTesentiy, no part whatever of the sums suspended or re- 

ec ed bY m P e in the audit of your accounts, consists of money paid to 

he before named person, fro part whatever .with that excepUon 

~r *u* «nm<; naid out bv you, and not accounted tor by tne persons 

n>otuu paid at the treasury to persons by your order: but it was money 
which ?ou paid out of the monies drawn by yourself.and which passed" 
rhrou/h vour hands. What becomes then of the accusation, that I 
Lent f oVaccountable for large sums paid at the treasury to otherpe - 
1 P / t, is no t so, and I cha lenge you to shew it. The payments 
o Messrs Edmonds and Piatt, though charged to you in the first in- 
stance were aTerwards, and long since, credited to you and charged 
to £ and of this, with respect to Mr. Plan I 'f'™^^ 
Inn* f See Assembly journal, 1818, page 466.) And Mr. tdmonas 
havtn^been appointed on the 1st September, 1814, pr.nopal pay- 
mastefofThe volunteers and militia, it was made necessary to open 
an account with him, for the same reasons as exited »J« $ 
Mr. Piatt, (ibid, pages 454 and 498 and act of : « .Oct. .WA, c P / 
Thp «»her Dersons who received the money at the treasury "* ,, 
Jounted to P you for it, and yott have reeved eredtt f.r t.e expend- 



fure. What iredence ought your assertions to receive, when they 
are thus shown by undeniable, written, public evidence, to be incor- 
rect ? 

The exception above alluded to, is in the case of John M'Lean,late 
commissary of military stores. His account was the only one in 
which money paid at the treasury to agents by your order, was sus- 
pended by me in the general settlement of your accounts. On a par- 
ticular examination of the 25,500 dollars paid to him at the treasury* 
as before mentioned, I find it was paid at the following times : 

1808, May 19, $10,000 

1809, Oct. 2, 1,000 
1812, Feb. 20, 7,000 

1811, June 5, 1,500 

1812, Aug. 17, 2,000 
1816, April 16, 4,000 

25,500* 
You will find on examining; my report of suspended items in your 
account, that only the last three of these sums are included therein ; 
the rest of them have consequently been accounted for. These three 
items amount to seven thousand Jive hundred dollars ; and of these, 
only the last two, amounting to six thousand dollars, appear to De- 
claimed by you in your final abstract delivered to me last April. I 
therefore assert that these two items are all that you can prove (and 
I challenge the proof of any more) that were paid by your order at 
the treasuary to other persons, and for which you were held respon- 
sible. 

It must always be understood, that I admit that the sum of 889, 
250 was thus paid, but it was accounted for before the general 
settlement of your accounts the 6lh March, 1818, and no part of it 
appears among your vouchers as advances for which you claim cre- 
dit, except the above mentioned 6000 dollars. 

So far was I from indulging in a " pertinacity'' in keeping you ao 
countable for monies that ought to have been debited to others j that 
after the commencement of the war, when discovering that you had 
a variety of complicated and arduous duties to attend to, I more than 
once suggested the propriety of your releasing yourself from a portion 
of your responsibilities and labours, by giving orders in favour of the 
commissary, or other proper officers in every case where the act ma- 
king the appropriations would admit of ite being so done ; and I 

* It is but justice to Mr. McLean to say, that he has uniform!}' maintained, that he is 
a creditor of the state, or of yours, in a larg>- amount, having been obliged to pay out of 
h : s own funds, heavy bills lor articles procured for the state, because you had neglected 
to tarnish him with money, and because he had made himself personally liable. He 
has repeatedly endeavoured to procure a settlement of his accounts with you, and you have 
often agreed to meet him, and for this purpose- particular days have been set; but you 
never came forward. You have claimed and obtained credit for advances to Mr. McLean 
to tjie amount of #33,192.58 — and his accounts of expenditures, remaining in his hands, 
and not rendered to you, and by you to this office, amount only to about #25,000 which 
will of course leave him a debtor of the stale for about #8000. Now to compel him to 
pay this balance into the treasury, or to account for it, if what he has constancy as- 
serted be true, will be extremely cruel and oppressive, but such compulsion will be ne- 
cessary en my part, unless you relinquish some of yow claims for advances made to him. 



■Vk 

seated cases where it might be done with propriety — Still you pur- 
sued your own course. 

Allow me to inquire where was the necessity of your drawing into 
your own hands the appropriations for the fortifications, and the ap- 
propriations for the commissary's and paymaster^ departments ? 
You drew them almost wholly ; for what reasons you can best an- 
swer. The following relation of facts and circumstances may aid 
you in determining why some of the monies were drawn by, and 
charged to you, and not to the subordinate officers. 

Of the appropriations made by the 39th section of the supply bill 
of April, 18l5, for procuring muskets, rifles, powder, cannon, &c. It 
appears you drew <g32.500, which ought, unquestionably, to have 
passed at once into the commissary general's hands. And because 
the money did not so pass in the regular and proper channel, it is 
now found that many of the articles required to be purchased by that 
act, have not been procured, and that they are, in fact, much want- 
ed for the public service, although more money has been drawn by 
you, and since your administration, by the commissary general, than 
was sufficient to have procured all that the act requires. This was 
but lately discovered, upon an application of the commissary general 
for an additional draught on the treasury, under the said section, 
which induced an inquiry into, and an estimate of the expense of all 
the articles to be procured under the act. Of the said sum, I find 
that ycu have accounted for, comparatively, vecy little. 

Of the appropriations for pay of the militia, volunteers, and sear 
fencibies, which certainly ought to have passed, from time to time, 
as the same might have been required, into the paymaster's hands, 
you drew §142,500 ; and of this you paid over to him only $117, 
500 ; retaining in your hands .$25,000. And the last appropriation 
made, during your administration, for the fottifications on Staten 
Island, amounting to $16,000, and made by an act passed 12th Nov. 
1816, ch. l6 s you drew 7 into your own hands, and you paid thereof 
to the commissioners of fortifications, only $2,631 79; and, conse- 
quently, retained in your hands Si 3,368 21 — that being the balance 
due from you on your fortification accounts ; to which, if we add 
$6000, received by you from the United States (particularly noticed 
hereafter) and not charged to you when your account was audited, 
the balance due from you on the fortification accounts, will be 
$19,368 21. And your conduct, in the latter case, is the more sur- 
prising, when it is recollected, that you urged, with much ardour, 
the necessity of making this appropriation for the completion of the 
works, and to preserve them from decay. More instances of this 
obaracter might be adduced, to show your willingness, and even 
anxiety ,to get appropriations made ; and not only made, but made 
to pass into your own hands — But it is unnecessary to swell the list. 

And now permit me to ask, what injustice you have suffered in my 
practice of keeping you responsible for money received at the trea- 
sury, by your agents ? Of SS9,250 thus paid : $56,000 were re- 
ceived by Messrs. Edmonds and Flatt, and afterwards charged to 
their account, leaving $33 ? 250 ; for which you were held responsible; 



li 

and this appears to have been paid to persons, easily called on to 
account, and who, in fact, did afterwards account for the whole, 
except the $6000 before mentioned. 

I trust, that the full exposition which I have given of this business, 
will cause men to be on their guard how they take your assertions 
.on trust, without examination For I think 1 have demonstrated, 
that your bitter complaint of " having been calied on to account, and 
" in many instances to re-account for money ; a very large amount 
" of which has been receipted for by others, and has never passed 
u through your hands," is utterly groundless and frivolous. 

The very unfounded complaint which you make, that your ac- 
counts have been thrown into perplexity by the various ways in 
which I have stated them, would have appeared to much better ad- 
vantage, if you had pointed out in a specific manner, the inconve- 
nience to which you have been subjected on that account. Loose 
and general charges of this kind, however frequent they are in your 
letter, and how well soever they may produce the effect intended, 
of poisoning the public mind, and prejudicing the community against 
me, betray a want of confidence in the justness of your cause ; and 
inspire me with a strong hope that I shall ultimately succeed in un- 
deceiving that community, and showing the history of these ac- 
counts in its true light. 1 am not conscious of any variety in stating 
your accounts ; I have pursued a plain and uniform system in that 
respect, as far as the nature of the accounts and vouchers would 
permit, and I challenge the scrutiny of any man who shall examine 
them. 

Copies of your account current, as audited the 27th August last, 
and of the abstracts, &c. composing it, marked (D) will be found in 
the Appendix from which it can be seen whether your complaints 
are well founded or not. 

Another complaint is, that I have " opened accounts which had 
u been examined and allowed, and for the ascertained balance of 
" which you had been paid as early as July, 1812, for the purpose, 
" you presume, of suspending in 1818, as questionable charges, large 
" sums comprised in those balances, and which were not restored to 
" your credit till August last ; thus holding you up to the community 
u as a debtor for money drawn from the treasury for audited balan- 
*' ances due and paid to you seven years ago." 

I deny that I have opened an}' account, which had been finally 
closed, and I shall now proceed to explain the mnlter to which you 
have here alluded. On the 2d July, 1812, your account for the pur- 
chase of ordinance, arms, and ammunition, was audited, when it ap- 
peared that there was a balance due to you thereon of $9,436.27a- 
for actual accounted expenditures. It appeared also that you had 
made advances on unsettled contracts to several persons, to the 
amount of 817-500 more, making with the before mentioned balance, 
the sum of $ 26-936.27£. This sum was paid to you at the trea- 
sury on the 8th July, 1812, agreeably to the 7th section of the fron- 
tier act of June, 1812. But it never was intended by me, and you 
kuew the rules by which 1 was governed in auditing accounts, top 



42 

well "to suppose, that the $17-500 advanced by you, was ever abso* 
lutely carried to your credit So far was that from being the case, 
that the certificate of the audit of the account now in question, ex- 
pressly states, that there was a balance due to you of 89,436.27^ 
and that in addition thereto you had made advances to the amount 
of 817,500 on unsettled accounts, for which you were to account 
hereafter. 

The whole amount of expenditures shown by you on the 2d July* 
1812, including the said gl7,500, was $83,700,271, but I passed to 
your credit only $66,186.27; the difference between these two sums 
is $17-514, of which $17,500 is for the advances which you had 
made, and $14. for an error in your account. Now with what pro- 
priety can you accuse me of having opened accounts which were 
closed* when the certificate which you have in your possession de- 
clares the contrary ? i appeal to that certificate, or to a copy there- 
of marked (E) in the Appendix to this letter. Na}s I have the ac- 
count rendered to me by yourself, to prove it. Why then do } r ou 
seek to inflame the public feeling against me, by asserting what is 
not the truth in this case ? The above mentioned advances were 
never carried to your credit till the last audit of your account, the 
27th August, 1819, and then it was done (that is, what remained un- 
accounted for) under the authority of the law passed expressly for 
the settlement of your accounts, by which I was directed to pass to 
your credit all monies paid by you in the public service, in advance,. 
There would have been no need of this law, if I had been in the 
practice of crediting you with advances whenever you made them. 
But though it was not my practice to pass advances to the credit of 
the persons making them, 'I have always mentioned in the certificate 
which I gave them of the audit of their account, that such advances 
had been made, and this would always show that they had paid out 
the money, though it is true, that they were still held accountable by 
me for the faithful expenditure of that money by the agents to whom 
it was entrusted. 

With respect to the private papers and duplicate charges which I 
reported to the legislature, 26th January, 1819, as it has been a fruit- 
ful source of complaint against me, as 1 have been vilified and abused 
in conversation and in the newspapers, on account of this report, and 
as you have made it the subject of heavy accusation against me in 
your letter, I beg leave to discuss the matter fully. 

On the 18th January, 1819 the assembly called on me to report to 
the legislature, whether the commissioners appointed at the prece- 
ding session to adjust your accounts, had performed that duty; and 
incase they had not, that I should then report "A detailed slate- 
" ment of the unsettled charges in the said account, and the objections 
•* to their allowance, to the end that some proper mode might be pre- 
61 scribed for their final settlement." 

According to my understanding of this resolution, I was called up- 
on to report all the charges which had been exhibited by yon against the 
state and not allowed by me t with my reasons for not allowing and pus* 
Hng them to your cn-dtt. And Ibis 1 believe is the honest understand- 



1 13 

ing of every unprejudiced and indifferent person. Otherwise, what 
were the " unsettled charges" in your accounts ? What was I to re- 
port to the assembly ? If I had adopted your construction of the res- 
olution, I should have reported nothing — that there were no unsettled, 
charges. For you admit that on the 20th of October, 1818, you wrote 
to me " to return to you all the vouchers and duplicates that mere not 
absolutely passed to your credit. 1 * 

You admit further, that on the 4th November, 1818, 1 returned to 
you all the vouchers and duplicates required ; except a few which were 
detained for special purposes,* and such as had been sent to Wash- 
ington. After this you say * Could I expect that the vouchers thus 
" withdrawn by me, and thus returned, of which mere lists had been 
" furnished, and which bad been sent to you under your letters invi- 
" ting to a want of care and scrutiny, could ever be regarded by any 
" one, and much less by you, as existing charges in my account ? >} 

Now I affirm, if these were not existing charges in your account, 
that I could not have reported any thing to the assembly. You re- 
quired me to return to you all the vouchers which had not been ab- 
solutely passed to your credit. You then deny that such vouchers 
(being withdrawn by you) can be considered as existing charges in 
your account. What then were the unsettled charges which the as- 
sembly called on me to report ? clearly no such charges remained, for 
your account was settled by having passed all your unobjectionable 
vouchers to your credit. But the assembly probably knew that there 
were some charges which remained unsettled, and therefore required 
me to state them. 

I really supposed that I had in my former letter, sufficiently explain- 
ed this business, and that the publication of what seems to have giv- 
en you so much offence, was a matter of necessity on my part, and 
not of choice. In that letter.1 said 44 Had you intimated, when any 
" of your vouchers were rendered, that no attention had been paid 
" to -them, and that some might have been rendered which ought not 
" to have been, and desired a return of all such, I should with pieas- 
" ure have made the separation But 1 beg you wiil take your own 
" conduct in the course Df this business into consideration, and then 
(i candidly say, whether I could with propriety, have acted otherwise 
"than I did. Previous to the audit of the account, I had heard it 
"rumoured, that you haid charged this office with the loss of many 
" of your vouchers. I thought it my duty then, in the examination, 
"to account in some way, for every paper you sent me, in the order 
" in which they stood charged in the abstracs. I had no reason to 
" suppose from your conduct; or any thing you ever expressed, that 
€i they were rendered without any care or deliberation. Ttie parcel 
" delivered by Mr. Ironside, is the most defective of the whole, and 

* The manner in which you mention the retention, by me, of some of these vouchers, 
for special purposes, might lead one unacquainted with the facts, to suppose that tnese 
purposes were sinister and improper. The lew vouchers which I did retain of those not 
passed to your credit, were principally kept because jjie receipts were tor advances on 
unsettled contracts, incases where the persons who received the money were sued (or the 
fulfilment of those contracts, which made it necessary to retain the receipt! as evidence 
against them : or because the voucher was partly allowed, and therefore necessary to be 
retained as a voucher for such part. These are the (i >-pecial purposes." 



u 

* contained more of exceptionable items than any that had been ren- 
dered Could I suppose that these were delivered without an ex- 
amination ? You told me when I was at Staten Island, that it 
? would require but a few hours to arrange and make an abstract of 
"them; and yet several weeks had elapsed before they reached me. 
"It was not intimated by yon, nor yet by Mr. Ironside, that any of 
u the vouchers might be of a character that would require their dis- 
" allowance or return : nor was any such intimation given at any oth- 
"erlrnie when rendering your accounts. I- 'did not and could not 
" know that the rejected and suspended items, and the remarks 
* ( thereon, were ever to be published. The re, arks, when prepared, 
u were intended for your eye alone." 

I thought that this plain statement of facts, was sufficient to put at 
rest this part of our controversy; hut it seeffcs I was mistaken You 
publish portions of my letters, requesting you t<*> account, with the 
view of endeavoring to shew, that i had advised you to empty your 
bureau and trunks, and send their contents to me, without a consid- 
eration of their nature or character. Now, sir, I ask in the name of 
candor, do my letters invite to any such thing ? You always spoke 
of the trouble of classification und arrangement of your vouchers, 
whenever I pressed for a settlement. I, therefore, to prevent the 
interposition of such excuses, informed you, that I would attend to it 
for you. This was no invitation to repeat tlie same charge tvoQ or three 
times, nor yet to charge private vouchers. I requested, it seems, that 
lists of the vouchers should be made by you, and they were made. 
The mere making of these lists* afforded abundant opportunity for 
you to detect the double and private charges, if any wish existed to 
exclude them. Had I pressed you to send me your trunks, or their 
contents in a "basket," without lists or abstracts, then, indeed, might 
you talk of misplaced confidence, with some reason. Now, the 
whole is mere "device," to draw public attention from the merits of 
the question between us ; to excite odium against ine, and sympathy 
for yourself 

I said, u the remarks, when prepared, were intended for j r our eye 
alone." They were so, and I had not the remotest idea, at the time, 
that a call would have been made upon me to give them publicity. 
They were sent to you in March, 1818, and in the month following, 
you were here. Why did not you then ask the return of such vouch*- 
ers as you now pretend you never intended to send me ? Why did 
not you then inform me that there were such in my possession ? But 
no — you gave not the slightest intimation, that you had sent any that 
you did not intend to send, until after the publication alluded to. 

In October, 1818, you sent me a letter, by Mr. Qnackenbush, re- 
questing the return of all such vouchers as had been suspended, disal- 
lowed, or that had not been absolutely passed to your credit. You say, 
that I acknowledged the receipt of this letter, "without setting forth 
its terms ;" by which, I presume, you intended to be understood, 
^iat there was some proof against myself in it. To shew you that I 
had no such intention, I subjoin copies of that, and also of one receiv- 
ed in September, preceding, marked (F.) What do thcss letter? 



15 

prove, or what is to be inferred from their contents ? Not, surety) 
that the suspended and disallowed charges, or any part of then*, 
were such as were not intended by you to be debited to the state. 
In these letters, you say not one word of withdrawing those vouchers, 
as charges against the state. The legislature, in 18 . 8, had appointed 
commissioners to settle your accou ts. My firm belief was, that yon 
requested a return of those vouchers, with the view to submit them 
to these commissioners. 

In obedience, then, to the resolution of the assembly, I reported a 
statement of all the suspended and disallowed items, in your lists or 
abstracts of vouchers, with the r-asons for suspension and disallow- 
ance, which had been communicated to yourself, about a year before. 
In doing this, I did precisely what I supposed, and still suppose, the 
resolution required. The assembly must have had an object in view 
in making the call ; and that could have been no other than, if the 
commissioners had not settled your accounts, to ascertain on what 
principles I had acted, in suspending; ai:d rejecting your charges, to 
the end, as they said, in their resolution, "that some proper mode 
might be prescribed for their final settlement." They did not re- 
quire a statement of your accounts with the state, as settled by me; 
that was afterwards required and furnished ; but "a detailed state- 
ment of the unsettled charges.'' • What coHld I possibly understand 
by this, but a statement of all charges made by you, and not passed 
to your credit ? Where should I have stopped, if I bad not adopted 
the course I did ? Had I pretended to have excluded such items 
as I thought myself you ought never to have charged, I might have 
excluded items that you claimed to be properly chargeable to the 
state. Indeed, it is very manifest, from another part of your letter, 
that you are now claiming, or pretending to claim, double, and oth- 
er equally absurd and unjust charges, "as existing claims against the 
state," If you are not, I should like to know how you make up the 
$7 1,972 51, which Mr. Thompson, and others, certify you claim as 
"existing charges against the stat^v' I defy you to make up that 
sum, without making it up, principally, of double and other equally 
inadmissible charges. But this shall hereafter be more particularly 
discussed. 

I admit, that I might have mentioned, that you had requested, in 
October 1818, to withdraw all the vouchers that had been suspended, 
or di-ailowed, and not absolutely passed to your credit ; but I could 
not have stated that they were not to be charged to the state. The 
settlement of your accounts had then been placed in other hands 
than mine ; and the only conclusion that was, or could be drawn, 
from the circumstance of your requesting a return of these vouchers, 
was that you wanted them to account in your settlement with the 
commissioners. 

It is astonishing to see how you pervert and torture my language, 
in order, if possible, to make me appear inconsistent ; and, as acting 
in bad faith to you, in respect to the suspended and rejected charges. 
I said in my former letter, that "I did not, and could not know, that 
the rejected and suspended items) and the remarks thereon, were ev- 



1(5 

er to be published. The remarks ivhen prepared were intended for 
your eye alone." The latter sentence you did not think proper to 
quote; that would not so well have answered your purpose. After 
giving a portion of the above quotation, you proceed in the following 
strain : c< How wretclied is this subterfuge/ what sir ! was the open 
«' communication of them to the Assembly no publication ? was their 
" entry on the journals nothing ? were you so little conversant with po- 
" litical affairs as not to know, that even newspaper publication of them, 
" would be a matter of unavoidable consequence ! you were no suchno~ 
u vice, but I qiiit this disgusting topic" There was no subterfuge, 
sir, on my part : but there is a wretched want of candor on yours, in 
thus perverting my language. I was not, indeed, such a "novice" 
as not to suppose, after a report was made to the legislature on an 
interesting subject, "that even newspaper publication of them would 
be a matter of unavoidable consequence." I had reference to the 
time (March,1818) when the remarks were made and sent to you,not 
to the reporting of them to the assembly in 1819. The public expos- 
ure of such as you never intended to charge (if any such there were) 
you might easily, as I stated before, have prevented It would have 
been an easy matter for you in the spring of 1818, when here, to 
have singled out such items, as you wished to be entirely excluded 
from your accounts, and to have withdrawn them as such. 

And here I cannot forbear to add the opinion of the joint commit- 
tee of the legislature, of which Mr. Davis was chairman, on this sub- 
ject. After saying that the large amount of double and other impro- 
per charges reported by me, might be attributed to your having deli- 
vered me your vouchers without order or arrangement, relying on 
my intimation that I would examine, assort, and pass only such to your 
credit, as were proper, they go on to say : " In making this explana- 
" tion, your committee do not mean to be understood as imputing 
u any censure whatever on the faithful and intelligent officer who 
& made the report. In making that report, he did no more than act 
u in obedience to the resolution of the house, calling on him for the 
" report." 

Again, you charge me with a "gross attempt" to impress on the 
public a belief that you preferred claims on the treasury, under the 
law of last session, to the amount of $605,000. It is utterly false. 
I defy any man to use language more explicit and clear than mine 
in my former letter, which on this point, I will repeat here, and I 
call on you to say whether it is possible the most ignorant man in this 
community can misunderstand me. 

In my former letter, after relating the circumstances under which 
the law was passed, I say, " let us now see the extent of the claims 
you have made upon the treasury under that law." 

" When your excellency handed me the opinion of your counsel, 
" and the case you had prepared for them, there was annexed a sche- 
" dule marked A. This paper has not been published by you with 
" those to which it was attached. A copy of it is in my hands, and 
n I insert it here, with the exception of that part which relates to re* 
ejected or suspended rhn r ^s. 



17 

"SCHEDULE A." 

a Claims of Daniel D* Tompkins, late goi:emor of the state of New- 
York, allowed and recommended by the commissioners appointed by the 
legislature; over and above $884,461 ?4, previously audited and ad- 
mitted b} r the comptroller, and over and above $t 36,625. 44 suspend- 
ed by him* viz : 

1819, April 1. Interest and premium on $42,157.88, 
beh)£ the balance audited and advanced by me for 
the public service in 1812, which was [not] settled 
or repaid till 181 6. 4 years, $15,179.50 

To commissions on $1, 075,021.72 drawn, expended and 
accounted for to the state, and for risk and responsibil- 
ity for all officers and agents to whom the money was 
confided, expenses, journeys, command, losses, &c. at 
5 percent. 53,751.98 

Interest thereon 4 years, 15,050.52 

To commission on $2,363,516.27, obtained from the U. S. 
and upon personal loans and advances expended and 
accounted for, 118,175.80 

Interest on the last mentioned commission 4 years and 6 

months to 1st July, 18i9, 37,225.28 

To premium and discount of $1,095,000 at 20 per cent, in 
stock, being the amount loaned on my personal responsi- 
bility, and advanced and accounted for, 277)506 
Interest thereon to 1st April, 1819, 4 years and 3 months, 80,402.25 
Interest for three months on $53,751 98, on $118,175 80, 
and on $277,500, from 1st April, 1819, to 1st July, 
1819, 3 months, 7,864.43 



$605,155.76" 
u This schedule presents, in two of its items, the statement of your 
zi claims under the law, to wit: tlte sum of $277)506, being the premi- 
" um or discount, as calculated by you, on $L,095,000, (which, you 
u there state, you had borrowed on your " personal responsibility , J> 
" and accounted for,) and interest on that premium, amounting, by 
f< your calculation, to $80,402.25, making together the swn of 
" $357,908.25. This sum of $1,095,000, was afterwards reduced 
w by you to about $1,000,000, and you intimated a willingness to re-. 
" fer the question of interest to the legislature, as one on which you 
" thought I had some reason to doubt, though you had none your- 
" self. I ought not here to omit to state, that in the exhibits of your 
"claims which I saw in the hands of the commissioners, the items 
" " premium," &c. and of " interest on the premium," were not 
" carried out, but remained in blank. 

" This sum of $277,506 you certainly meant to represent as due to 
(t you, without any deduction on account of its being a stock premium 9 
" because you charge interest on the whole amount" 

Wherein then in my former letter, do I, in the remotest degree inti- 
mate that you claim $605,000 under the law ? can language be more 
explicit ? I published the schedule with the simple and only view of 

$ 



18 

showing your own calculation, of the premium and interest thereon £ 
and thereby demonstrated that your claims under the law amounted 
to about $$60,900, or S230,000 over and above cancelling the balance 
due from you to the slate. I may here add, that if I had had the 
Views you ascribe to me, I certainly should not have stopped where I 
did. hut should have published an additional schedule, or the latter 
par* of the same that was published, and which accompanied the 
ca.se prepared for your counsel I take now, however, the liberty of 
annexing a copy of the schedule entire, marked (G.) From this the 
extent, and nature of all the varwus claims you have set up against the 
state may be seen, not wader the acU it is true ; but yet they are all 
claims which I believe you urged to be equitably due to you. They 
amount together, to the sum of one million and six thousand, seven 
hundred and sixty-one dollars and twenty-three cents. 

Again, you charge me in substance with a wilful misconstruction 
of the aet of the last session, with the view to injure and oppress 
you, and to defeat the declared will of the legislature. These are 
high charges. They affect me sensibly. I shall therefore enter 
more fully than formerly, into a consideration of this part of the 
Subject. 

You have thought proper to urge many reasons not appearing on 
the face of the act itself to support your construction of it, and to 
ascertain the real intention of the legislature. I might with justice 
object to any attempt of this kind : for most certainly, no proposi- 
tion can be more clear, than that every public officer is bound in 
construing ataW, to look only to the law itself. Indeed no case can 
be stated or imagined, in which it would be proper for me to search 
for extraneous matter, to determine tl^e true meaning of an act. No 
officer of the government is more frequently called on than myself, to 
judge of the construction of laws ; and if I should ever suffer sug- 
gestions of the individual opinions and views of the members of the 
legislature to influence iny judgment, it may easily be seen, what un- 
certainty and confusion would ensue in the transaction of the public 
business. But as you have persisted in attempting to embarrass the 
question, by a departure from this salutary rule, I shall in some mea- 
sure follow your example, merely for the purpose of explanation and 
defence j and with the view to introduce something like order into 
this part of the discussion, I shall proceed, first, to notice the circum- 
stances connected with the origin and passage of the law, with the 
view to shew what ivas actually intended to be effected by it, and un- 
der what representations and assurances on the part of yourself and 
your friends, it was adopted ; and 1 shall then consider the true con- 
struction of the act> without reference to any thing but itself. In do- 
ing this, I am aware. I shall be under the necessity of occasionally 
repeating things contained in my former letter. 

I stated in my former letter, that I had no doubt, that the intention 
of the committee which reported the act, and of the members of the 
legislature who voted for it, was "to extinguish the balance of your 
accounts with the state," and they selected for that purpose that item 
of your claims, which appeared to them best calculated to answer that 
elttf. In proof of this, I explicitly stated in my fprmer letter, that the 



19 

committee applied tp me in yonr presence, to be informed of the 
amount of the balance against you, that I estimated it at about 
$120,000, and that you assented to tlie correctness of that estimate. 
This statement you have not any where questioned or denied But I 
have not relied on this alone. In order to ascertain whether my re- 
collection on this subject was substantially corrects I addressed ou the 
12th ult. several queries to Mr. Bacon, a member of the committee, a 
copy of which marked (A) will be found in the appendix, and of his 
answer marked (B) and similar queries in all respects were at the 
same time addressed to Mr. Davis, the chairman, with the exception 
of the ninth, which was omitted in consequence of the answer which 
I observed he had given to Mr. Marcy's letter, published in your ap- 
pendix. It would have been indelicate to have repeated that ques- 
tion. The answers to these inquiries will be found in the appendix 
marked (C), and you will perceive that 1 an> fully corroborated in 
my statement and recollection of the circumstances. 

Frooi these answers it conclusively appears : 

That the committee applied to me Jo know the amount of the bal- 
ance against you. 

That I stated it at about the sum of $1?0,Q00. 

That you assented to the general correctness of that estimate, and 
never denied that in any event, there would be a large balance 
against you. 

That you furnished a statement in your own hand writing* in which 
you represented the premium on the money claimed to have been bor- 
rowed by you, to be an average often per cent. 

That the committee undoubtedly selected that item, because it 
would give you a. sum nearly equal to the balance which existed against 

That the committee inquired of you, whether the premium might 
not exceed ten per cent. 

Thatfrom the answers you gave, Co). Davis was satisfied, that the 
premium would not in anyjevent exceed twelve per cent. 

That the clause in the bill directing the payment to you, of any 
balance that might be found due (on which you much rely, as man- 
ifesting the intentions of the committee) was admitted to save your 
feelings ; that it was objected to, as being at war with the manifest in- 
tention of the bill ; and it was assented to, because it was contended, 
that great doubt existed whether any balance would be due you, and 
because your friends declared, that they did not believe, if a balance 
was found, that you would insist on it, knowing as you did the growth* 
wpon which the, allowance was to be- recommended. 

Can there remain a doubt, sir, as to the real object and inte**ion of 
the framers of that law ? 

Knowing, as you did, that object— conceive my astonishment a* 
learning in the short space of two or three days aft*** *he passage of 
the bill, that you stated to a gentleman i« Albany, that the premium 
would be 24 per cent. What new information had you so soon acquir- 
ed relative to the rates of premium ? or did you know when before 
the committee, what you so well understood, two or threerfays after- 
wards? The rate of premium depended on the dates ot the loaqs: 



20 

you were familiar with those dates : your attention doubtless had 
been much given to the subject. I forbear to state the inference, 
that seems almost irresistibly to result from these circumstances. 

The legislature passed the lavv> with *he view of relieving you from 
your heavy responsibilities to the state, and with the view of saving 
your reputation. The obtaining; of the loans too, perhaps had some 
influence in the >making of the allowance : but the great and para- 
mount reason for making it, was the desire for a settlement of your 
accounts, so difficult to be understood, and which had- occasioned so 
much trouble ; and to release you from your responsibilities, and 
thereby place you in a respectable attitude with regard to your mo- 
ney concerns with the state, which was so much desired by ail for 
your sake, and for that of the state itself. These were the reasons, 
I sincerely believe, which actuated the legislature. All felt a deep 
interest in your teputation, and anxiously wished to see you freed, 
from your embarrassments with the state. But nobody ever thought 
of granting you an immense fortune, over and above releasing you 
from the balance you owed. It was not, as you say, " in view of 
the great losses which you had evidently sustained in my statement 
of your accounts" that the allowance was made. You complain 
bitterly, that 1 should thus represent as an act of " bounty ,? on the 
part of the state, what you now claim to have been your righto 
What is it but a mere act of bounty ? . You claimed a premium on 
money borrowed by you. You borrowed it for the United States, on 
the credit of funds furnished by them : You expended it in the ser- 
vice of the United States : It has all been repaid by the United 
States : If you had any claim, is it not clear it was a claim on the 
United States ? Nay, sir, does not the act itself provide, that I shall 
charge to the United States the whole allowance made to you ? 
Upon what pretence could it be charged to the general government, 
if that government was not bound to pay it ? and do you pretend 
that you could have a claim of right against both governments, at the 
same time, for the same thing ? 

It is abundantly evident, that by the law in question, the state 
gratuitously assumed the payment of a claim, which, if it existed at 
all, existed only against the United States ; and will you deny this, 
when you refer again to the letter of Col. Davis, and there find, that 
you stated, " that a large quantity of muskets," &c. belonging to the 
United States, and amounting in value to something like g400,000, 
>»/ere now in the state arsenals, and that these would be an indemnity 
to \he state, for the allowance made by the law to you ? What pos- 
sible right could the state have to retain them as such indemnity, if 
the allowance thus made to you, was of right due from the state ? 

The fact that the state possessed these arms, was asserted by you. 
It was believtU possible, and might have influenced the minds of 
som« of the memWs of the legislature in voting for the law. But I 
am happy, for tiie honour of the state to be enabled to say, that you 
were entirely mistaken. When the state government understood, 
that such % statement hid been made, an inquiry was set on foot, and 
the result has been- as 1 am informed, that there are no arms in the 
state arsenal^ beyond those purchased with the funds of the state, 



21 

with the exception of less than one hundred muskets, and it is not 
improbable thot even this small number is the property of the state. 
If there had been arms belonging to the United States, in the state 
arsenals, as you represented, they would have been delivered up to 
the general government without delay. The idea would not be tole- 
rated for a moment, by the officers of the government of this state, 
that it would not be utterly disgraceful to its character to retain the 
property of the United States, accidentally in the state arsenals, un- 
til t l ;e general government should repay the money allowed to you, 
without its conseut. The suggestion by you, that this might be done, 
excited more disgust in the minds of even your particular friends, 
than they have ever chosen to avow to you. 

Cease- then, te claim now, as matter of right, what you were wil- 
ling and artxioUs last winter, to receive as a <l bounty" You cannot 
have forgotten, how often, and how bitterly ; you have complained to 
me, to the committee, and to many others, of the injustice and bad 
faith, of the general government towards you ; nor your assurances 
to me, that when that government, did you justice, you would pay 
the balance honestly due from you to the state. Surely then, you 
ought to be willing to acknowledge as " bountiful," the disposition 
manifested by the state, to relieve you from your embarrassments. 

That you did claim 25 per cent, as the premium, and interest 
thereon, under the law, is beyond all doubt. I will relate what took 
place in July, in respect to this part of our controversy, and then let 
the candid determine whether the demand was not as effectually, 
and to all intents and purposes, made, as if you had stated a regular 
account against the state, for the premium, and interest thereon. 
You preseuted to me a letter from Isaac Bronson, Esq. a copy of 
which. I annex, marked (H) and you yourself calculated the premi- 
um and interest, in a schedule accompanying the case you prepared 
for your counsel, a copy of a part of which I furnished in my former 
letter, and which will also be found in this. 

With the view of inducing you to reflect on the unreasonableness 
of your demand, and to reduce it within the limits intended by the 
legislature, if you had any such intention, I brought to your notice, 
as de'icately as I could, the intention of the committee. I stated 
that the premium mentioned in Mr. Bronson's letter was double, and 
I ought to have said, more than double, any thing the committee had 
ever thought of allowing; I stated that their intentions had clearly 
been, simply to square the account between you and the state. 

In answer to my remarks as to the views of the committee, you 
said you had not understood them as I had done. You presented 
Mr. Bronson's letter as evidence of what the premium was ; you had 
calculated it in the schedule annexed to the opinion of your counsel ; 
you never disclaimed any part of it. Had not 1 a right then, to un- 
derstand you as claiming the premium at the rate of 2j per cent, and 
interest thereon ? Nay, could I possibly have understood you oth- 
erwise ? and yet, after being defeated in your hopes iast summer, 
and after our negotiations had ceased, you, at one of the three calls 
you made on me before you left this city, told me as I stated in my 



22 

former letter to yoUi that you presumed I bad labored under a mis* 
take as to the principle of calculating the premium : that the real pre- 
mium would hot be more than thirteen per cent, and the final balance 
due you, about $25,000, being about the sum which you said the 
joint committee intended to give you. You moreover added, on that 
occasion, that had I given the construction to the act which you con- 
tended for, you meant to permit me to proceed in crediting you, ac- 
cording to my own rule of calculation ; and then to take the merit 
of pulling nie right. It appears to me manifest, then, that so long as 
there was any prospect of succeeding in obtaining the premium at 25 
percent, or one dollar upon every four which you borrowed, besides 
an interest of between eighty and ninety thousand dollars thereon, 
you claimed these enormous sums ; but when you were foiled, that 
you then felt alarmed at the effect such claims would have on the 
public mind, and you resorted to the miserable subterfuge, of attempt- 
ing to induce me to believe, that the premium was in reality na 
more than about 13 per cent- 

You say. "the amount of the premium was never a subject of dis-r 
Cussion between us/' Do you really think, sir, that the public can. 
be induced to believe that this was so ? is it to be conceived, that in 
April 3 should hear, that you meant to claim double the premium con- 
templated by the committee ; that on the 2 ( Jth July you should put 
into my hands the letter of Mr. Bronson, shewing clearly that the 
rate of the premium was 25 per cent. ; that (in corroboration of Mr. 
Bronson's evidence, I presume) you placed in my hands a certificate 
of Messrs. Prime, Ward and Sands, (a copy of which marked (I) will 
be found in the appendix) shewing the market price of stocks in No- 
vember and December, 1814, being the period when you made your 
loans ; that you also, and at the same time, placed in my hands your 
case for your counsel, with the schedule containing your calculations 
of the premium, and of the interest thereon ; and that I should retain 
all these papers and evidences of the extent of your claims for prer 
mium,&c. until the 2d of August, when our negotiations ended ; and. 
yet. that there should be no discussion between us as to the amount 
of the premium ? I ask, sir, whether this is credible ? besides, did I 
not, as stated in a former part of this letter, expressly bring to your 
notice your own representations to the committee, as to the rate, and 
their views and understanding as to the amount ? I did so, but un- 
fortunately without producing any effect or change of conduct on 
your part. And you enquire how could the amount of premium be 
a subject of discussion, when I avowed that I could not credit you 
with one cent under the act ? I did say, in my last letter, that from 
(he contracts and other papers relative to the loans produced by you, 
I could not credit you any thing. But you will recollect, sir, that 
of those contracts and papers J knew nothing until the last evening of 
our negotiations, when I took them home witii me for examination. 

"The amount of the premium," you say, ''would have been vari- 
ous, depending on the times the several loans and advances of cur- 
rent money were made." We were led to believe so last spring* 
from your representations te the cemroiUeej it is true $ but that yoa 



2$ 

should now talk of their being various, when the evidence you yM& 
self produced, demonstrates that the same rate, <>f premium applied 
to all your loans, is only another instance of the extraordinary asser- 
tions you are capable of making, to answer your purposes for the mo- 
ment. 

Allow me now to state what your claims under the law were, in 
July and August last. They were clearly and unequivocally as fol- 
lows : 

Premium of 25 per cent, on about one million of dollars. T say 
a million, because you had yourself reduced in July, (but not for the 
reasons you now assign) the $1,1 10,000 spoken of before the com- 
mittee, to about one million, $250,000 
Interest thereon from Jan. 1, 18/5, (the loans having 

been made in December, 1814. and January, 1815,) 

to 1st August, 1819? being 4 years and 7 months. 80,208 

330,^08 
By your calculations in the schedule which accompanied your case^ 

you make the amount of your claims under the act about $360,000. 

Your claims then under the act, in July and August, accordir g to my 

calculation, (being considerably less than yours,} were $330,208. 

And had your rule of construction of th^ act been adopted, what 

would you have drawn out of the treasury? 

You would have drawn at least §204,578,50. 

For the premium on one million of dollars, at 

25 per ceut is, as stated before, 250,000 

And the interest, 80,208 



330,208 



from which, if there be deducted the balance of 

your account as now ascertained, 125.629 50 



There will remain 8204,578.50 

as the sum which you would have drawn out of 

the treasury. 

It is true, that on the evening upon which our negotiations endedj 
you agreed to waive the question of interest, for the decision of the 
legislature ; but did not abandon it : You claimed it as your equita- 
ble and evert legal right, although you agreed not to press it upon 
me for allowance at that time. Well, sir, what do your claims' amount 
to now ? You do not reduce them, that I can find : You take special 
care not to commit yourself to accept of a less sum than the act, accor- 
ding to your construction, will give you. It is clearly to be inferred, 
then, that when circumstances shall be brought about (if they can be 
so brought about) to favor your views, you purpose to draw out of the 
treasury at least $204,578.50 over and above cancelling the balance 
against you. 

I thought that in the letter before me, you would have exercised 
your ingenuity in showing that a premium certified to be 25 per cent, 
was no more than about thirteen, a»strange subterfuge you resorted 
to, at the moment of alarm, when foiled in obtaining the allowance 
©f the whole. 



24 

I now proceed to state my view of the construction of the law in 
question, according to the terms of it ; the only way in which I have 
ever felt myself at liberty, in my official capacity, to consider it. It 
is really of little consequence, in this view of the subject, what mo- 
tives or reasons led to the passage of the law ; what opinions of its 
effects and operations, were entertained by the members of the legis- 
lature; or what claims you have made under it. 

The question is, what is the fair meaning of the act, as it passed ? 
If the legislature really intended to allow you a premium on ali the 
loans on which you now claim it, and they have omitted to express 
that intention in 4he law, or have expressed it so doubtfully, a- to 
leave room for a real, and honest, difference of opinion ; sifrely you 
will not deny, that, considering the magnitude of the subject in con- 
troversy, it was my duty, as a prudent officer, to suspend the execu- 
tion of the law until the legislature could explicitly declare its wilt. 

The act itself will be found in the Appendix, marked (K). By it 
I am directed to allow you, in the final settlement of your accounts, 
a premium on all monies ** borrowed and obtain^' 1 by you, on your 
il personal responsibility," It was clearly, then, a matter of fact to 
be ascertained by evidence, in every case in which you claimed an 
allowance, whether the loan was made to you on yoiir own credit or 
on the credit of any pledge of property beloiiging t> you, or on the 
collateral security of your friends -by way of endorsement or otherwise. 

Did the lender look to your credit and responsibility ? Did he rely 
onit? W&sit the security on which he at all rested ? You and your 
counsel think that in all cases in which your persona! responsibility 
was at all pledged, you are entitled to the premium. Suppose n^xv, 
for the sake of illustration, that it had so happened, when negotiating 
some of these loans with the banks, you had laughed at the idea of 
pledging your personal responsibility for such large su;jus, avowing 
th^t it was worth nothing: and that it was required only because 
you were acting as the a^ent of the general government, and with 
the view to impose some additional obligation on that government to 
repay the money punctually, in order to save you from embarrass- 
ment ; and that you were expressly told, at the time, that you were 
never to be called on, and were not expected to pay one dollar. — 
Suppose, I say, such a case, can it be said, without doing violence to 
common sense, that the money on such a loan, was "obtained on 
your personal responsibility ?" That such a case might exist is evi- 
dent ; and it is enough to show, that the general /irincifile laid down 
by your counsel is unfounded. 

Let it always be remembered, that the, treasury notes deposited by 
you as security for these loans, "fyere not ypur/irofierty. [f other 
persons deposited the certificates of stock which they received from 
the government, " at the banks and other places," to aid their per- 
sonal responsibility in procuring the money they wanted to fulfil their 
engagements with the government, the certificates were their own 
property. This was not your situation ; treasury notes were placed 
in your hands by the government, to enable you to raise current mo- 
ney : they were the property of the government. There was there- 
fore a manifest difference between you and these persons in this re- 



« 25 

spect. Had the loans been obtained by you on your personal re- 
sponsibility, or by the aid of your own property, or the credit or pro- 
perty of your friends, then would you come within the fair intent and 
meaning of the act. A man's property and responsibility are con- 
vertible terms: his property is the foundation of his credit in pecu- 
niary matters : but there is and can be no connection between a man's 
personal credit, and the properly of another, although he may as agent 
have the disposition of that property, for the benefit of his principal. 
Your counsel seem to have overlooked this obvious distinction. — ■ 
Take the following extract from their opinion. " A contrary con- 
" strnction, which would limit the discount or premium to such loans 
l - only, as were effected by the late governor, on his personal respon* 
" nihility exclusively, would lead to the greatest injustice, because it 
u would be to deny to him the bounty of the government, in propor- 
4C tion as he involved beyond hi;? own, the responsibility of his friends, 
" or pledged his own property, or theirs, for the performance of his con- 
li traces. It seems to us therefore, that it would be repugnant to na- 
" tural justice, to allow to the late governor a. premium or discount 
" on money which he borrowed on his oiou individual credit, and re- 
" fuse it when he borrowed it on his own note, endorsed by a friend, 
** or on his own note or bond, secured by a mortgage on his own pro- 
(i fierty, or that of a friend This however would be the necessary 
il consequence of any other inter fir etation of the law, than the one we 
Ci give to it. We are therefore decidedly of opinion, that the late 
" governor is entitled, m.der the law referred to, to the discount or 
** premium, which it provides for, on all loans in current money 
* f made by him for the public use, where he became personally re- 
" sponsible or liable for the payment of the money borrowed, and 
" where such money was expended or disbursed by him in the pub- 
u lie service, notwithstanding he may have given as collateral secu- 
<< rity for such payment, an endorsement or mortgage, or made a de- 
tc posit of stock, treasury notes, or other property." 

Now, sir, is it not perfectly clear, that your counsel go through- 
out, on the basis, that the property pledged by yon, as collateral se- 
curity, was your own,orthat of your friends? and I doubt very much, 
whether, when they signed that opinioo, they knew that the treasu- 
ry notes, which you pledged as collateral security, were the proper- 
ty of the government. 

The fact is no where communicated to them in the case, you sub- 
mitted for their consideration. In that case, afier mentioning the 
last amendment moved by Mr. Oakley in the Assembly, you say: 
i; The object of the amendment was to limit the allowance on these 
" loans, where, in addition to persona*! responsibility, collateral se- 
" curity was given, to a different premium or discount, than those 
(i where there was no collateral security. •• Some of the monies were 
borrowed on my note endorsed by frieuds," and again you say— 
" He" (the comptroller) " partly questioned the propriety of making 
an allowance, if any collateral or additional security were added to 
ray personal responsibility," and you conclude the statement of your 
<"ase thus : '• I have therefore to request the favour of your ©piuions 

4 



IS 

6i upon this question — -whether under the, proceedings and law afore- 
" said, I am not entitled to the allowance mentioned therein, on all 
u current monies borrowed and expended by me, where, for the re- 
u payment of the whole loan, with interest, my personal responsibil- 
" ity was pledged, and where the proceeds of the loans were carri- 
" ed to my private credit in the banks, whether that personal re- 
(i sponsibility was fortified by collateral security or hypothecated stock? 
<l or treasury notes, or not ; with the same interest thereon, from 
i: the dates at which the respective loans and advances were made, 
" that others who loaned current money to the government at the 
" same periods on their stock, have received or been allowed.'* 

There is not one word in all your case, which could lead your coun- 
sel to think of the distinction which I have mentioned. You state 
the facts in such a way, that they must have believed, that the trea- 
sury notes pledged, were your own. If your counsel had adverted 
to the distinction at the time, they could hardly have omitted to notice 
it in their opinion, even if they had supposed that it made no differ- 
ence in the result : for they could not, with correctness^ have then 
said that " the necessary consequence of any other interpretation of the 
law than theirs,'* (and of course, then, of my interpretation,) would 
be to deprive you of the " premium on monies obtained an your own 
u note endorsed by a friend, or on your own note or bond, secured by a 
(t mortgage on your own property or that of a friend" If my con- 
struction of the act is right, you would be equally entitled in all these 
cases, to the premium ; but not in a single case in which you have 
claimed it under the law, and under this opinion of your counsel, 
which you attempt to apply to a state of facts in my judgment c$sen~- 
tially different from those which really ex^t. 

There is enough, sir, I flatter myself, in these considerations, to 
shew that the general principle for which you contend is not sound. 
Let us then go a little more into particulars. 

You mention the loans made by the banks in Albany as coming 
within the act, because your personal responsibility was pledged. Let 
the officers and agents of those banks who negotiated these loans be 
called on to say whether, in fact, you obtained the money from them, 
on your personal credit. If they will answer that you did, I will 
without hesitation credit you with the premium on these loans. 

But, sir, I have a much stronger case to which I invite your attend 
.lion. Among the loans on which you claim the premium under the 
law, is the loan made by you of the corporation of the city of New- 
York, on the 24th December, 18.14, stated in your list of loans to be 
$410,000 but actually I believe $400,000. To shew to me that you 
had obtained this money on your personal credit, you exhibited to me 
a certificate of Thomas R Smith, stating in substance, that, in his. 
opinion, the only security the corporation received for this loan, was 
your personal responsibility. I certainly did not think such evidence 
sufficient. 1 presume no person but yourself would have thought so. 

You afterwards asked me before you left the city, why 1 had not 
allowed the premium on the corporation loan, and 1 told you that the 
original contract and papers, or copies, ought to have been produced, 



.27 

to enable me to judge whether it came within the purview of the act 
or not ; and that 1 thought it would be very improper to be guided by 
-the mere opinion of an individual, as to the nature of the securities 
given. 

The correctness of the ground which I then took, I have been fully 
convinced of by further inquiry. 

It is now five years since your conduct in relation to that loan be- 
came a subject of newspaper controversy, and since the whole proce- 
dure was laid before the public. Whether the part which you took 
in that transaction, was marked by pure and perfect candor, or by 
management and artifice : whether the statement made by you, or that 
made by Mr. Mercein, (who negotiated with you in behalf of the cor- 
paration,) be true ; whether you were justly or unjustly censured by 
the public at that time ; are points on which I am not now called on 
to express an opinion. But as you have made a claim of 25 per cent, 
or $100,000, for your trouble and risk in making; that loan ; as you 
have maintained that you were entitled thereto, under the law, be- 
cause you had become personally responsible; and as you have charg- 
ed me with persecution and injustice because I refused to admit Mr. 
Smith's statement as conclusive evidence ; I cannot be censured for 
showing, from other indisputable testimony, that you never were 
personally responsible , and that y our personal responsibility was refus- 
ed. You doubtless recollect, that in November, 1815, the following 
letter was written ; 

November 23, 1815. 
" Gentlemen, 

li We have observed that a charge has been lately made and 
" publickly reiterated, against Governor Tompkins, intended to im- 
" peach his conduct, in relation to a transaction with the comptroller 
u of the corporation of the city of New- York. We are impressed 
<{ with the belief that the charge is entirely groundless, and wholly 
" founded on mistake or misrepresentation. 

" The governor's situation forbids his coming forward to answer 
" this attack. 

" But, by our request, he has very readily consented to permit us 
" or any other gentleman we might name, to examine any documents 
" in his possession, that may throw any light upon the subject. We, 
" therefore, take the liberty of soliciting you to have an interview 
" with his excellency Governor Tompkinsi and to receive from him 
' ; such documents as may be in his possession, having a tendency to 
" elucidate the real circumstances of the transaction. And we beg 
■f* leave to assure you, that you will render to the public a very great 
u service by openly submitting them to the community. 

" Yours, &c. 
JOHN TAYLER, JAMES KANE, 

THOMAS LAWRENCE, BENJAMIN KNOWER, 
CHARLES E. DUDLEY, JOHN SWARTWOUT, 
ISAIAH TOWNSEND, W. P. VAN NESS, 

JOHN W. tATES, W. FEW. 

' To Henry Rutgers, George Warner, Cadwallader D. Colden } 
Robert Bogardus, Jonathan Thompson^ Esquire %J^ 



28 

In conformity with this request, coining from men so distinguished 
and unimpeachable, the gentlemen to whom the above letter was ad- 
dressed, made, on the 2d December, I8l5,a long and laborious report, 
in vindication of your conduct, from which I extract the following 
passage : 

<k Though the corporation had pledged themselves to provide for 
" the monthly pay of the militia called out at their own soliciiation, 
" for the defence of the city, without stipulating for any other secu- 
Ci rity than their confidence ' that the same would be reimbursed on a 
il final settlement with the United Slates," 1 and therefore were, as the 
" committee [of defence in New- York] seem to think, in their report 
u of the 22d December. [1814] under an honorary obligation to pay 
'■^the militia without requiring any new security ; ) r et, when the gov- 
" ernor saw the distress which existed, and heard the clamours which 
"were ' raised by these dissatisfied men, 9 of which the committee 
'f speak so pathetically in the same report ; and found that the banks 
{i would make no further advances without the resjionaibility of the 
" corporation, and that the corporation would do nothing without se- 
{ - curiiy ; he did propose to pledge to them treasury notes for the 
■" loan he wished to make, and throughout the negotiation it was 
" understood as well by the governor as by the corporation, that the 
" corporation was to receive from him a deposit of $440,000 for the 
"loan of _g 400.000. " 

Among the documents in your favour, introduced by Col. Rutgers 
and his associates, in their report, is a certificate of Samuel Edmonds, 
dated I6th November, 1815, in which he says, " I certify that I was 
H present at head quarters at New- York, on the twenty-fourth De- 
C( cembe.r last, when governor Tompkins and Mr Mercein arranged 
" the loan of four hundred thousand dollars made by the corporation 
" to the general government, and that governor Tompkins informed 
"Mr. Mercein, that his agent had returned from Washington, with 
u authority to enter into the contract as originally proposed to the 
"corporation ; but (hat the treasury notes had not been sent on for 
t: the purpose of being deposited as a collateral security. and that they 
i( could not be made out and sent on under a month at least, but the 
" gov eminent had authorized him (the governor) to stipulate-in its 
(t behalf that they should be sent on before the loan became due." 

JNo.w, sir, permk me to ask whether any man can seriously contend 
that you obtained this sum of §400,000, on your personal responsi- 
bility ? Indeed, I have no doubt that had you stated this case to 
your counsel, they would at once have told you, that it did not come 
within the general principle. 

And yet on this loan (as before remarked) you have claimed under 
the iaw, a premium of 25 per cent., or one hundred thousand dollars, 
and, if I had yielded to your notion about interest, of much more 
than thatsum ; and i am accused of injustice toward? you, because 
I would not so constiue the law, as to authorize this enormous allow- 
ance, on a loan made to the general government, and for which you 
Were not personally re^fionsible. 

I was under the impression, till very lately, that the net as drawn 



29 

oy you, was passed without alteration. I find (although Mr. Bacon 
is of the same opinion) that I was incorrect in one important partic- 
ular. It appears now by a copy of the original draft which Mr. 
Davis has sent me, and by his letter, that you had so prepared the 
bill- that you were to be allowed the premium on all "monies procur- 
ed* borrowed and obtained" by you : omitting the important words 
" on you^ personal responsibility." These words were added at his 
suggestion, and they were undoubtedly added to limit the operation 
of the bill. This circumstance. I acknowledge, cannot alter the 
construction of the act as it stands ; but it certainly serves strongly 
to show both your views, and those of the committee, as to the nature 
of the loans on which the premium was to be allowed. 

You complain, however, of my construction, because you say that 
it would entirely defeat the biii, and that you would get nothing un- 
der it. \Vh\\ *>ir. that is not my fault, nor the fault of the law. It 
is simply because you cannot, in point of fact., bring 3 7 ourself within 
its terms. Suppose the act had expressly said, that you should have 
the premium only on such sums, as you had borrowed without the 
pledge of. treasury notes ; you would have been precisely in the same 
situation. You could not have obtained any thing under the law, as 
it now appears that you never borrowed any on such terms. Now 
the act as at present framed, amounts in my judgment to the same 
thing; and of course you get nothing, because you cannot show to 
.m<--, that you obtained any money on your 1 ' personal responsibility." 

VV.iie the subject was under examination before the joint commit- 
tee, T understood, that there were two de criptions of loans, which 
you claimed to have made. If you stated that all the loans were made 
with the aid of treasury notes, i certainly do not recollect it. You 
now rely much on the report of Messrs. Colden and Bogardus, to shew r 
that the loans were understood at the time, to be of the description 
you now aliedge. You say (page 51 of your letter) that the report 
of Messrs. Colden and Bogardus expressly states, a . that the loans re- 
C{ f erred to were on my personal responsibility aided by a deposit of col- 
li lateral security ," and that the report of the joint committee refers 
u to the loans mentioned by Colden and Bogardus as those on which 
£i they lecommended the discount." 

All this appears plausil>le — but see how utterly unfounded it is. 
Kefer again to Mr Davis' letter in the appendix (C) and to the report 
of thecommi sioners. They say(seepage 852 of the assembly journal 
/>f lSiy ,-, '* This money, we are informed and believe, was obtained 
u on his pricate credi',and was paid to the officers and citizens of the 
*'• stat- of New- York, and exclusively expended for its defence." And 
" again they say, (page 8*>4) supplies of every kind, and from every 
<l quarter, were demanded ; the resources and credit of the general 
li government were exhausted ; the slate government had not thought 
f? proper to extend its aid ; he could therefore only meet these exi- 
" g<neies by pledging ius personal responsibility to raise the necessary 
" funds : This he did and borroioed tftereon^ioith the assistance in some 
" instances of a deposit of depreciated currency as a collateral security, 
fl large sums of current money." Can any thing be more clear than 



so 

that the commissioners were led to believe from your representation© 
to them, that 3^011 borrowed large sums of current money ; that a. 
portion thereof, and much the largest portion too, had been borrowed 
on } 7 our personal responsibility alone, and that the residue (the small- 
est portion) had been borrowed on the pledge of treasury notes, or 
depreciated currency, added to your personal responsibility ? So 
sensible were you of the force of these remarks, and that the lan- 
guage used by the commissioners in their report, could bear no other 
interpretation than the one given by me, that you have been driven 
to the disgraceful necessity of misrepresenting and misquoting them. 
You say that the report expressly states, that the loans referred to, 
w; were on my fiersonal responsibility aided by a defiosit of collateral 
" security" To aid you in your purposes of ruining: me. and sus- 
taining yourself in your untenable ground, you pointedly and clearly 
misquote the language of the commissioners. The important words 
ic in some instances" which I repeatedly brought to your notice last 
summer, in support of my construction of the act, and of the inten- 
tions of the legislature, you have entirely and purposely omitted. 

You will see also, that Mr. Davis now candidly admits the mis- 
take into which he had fallen on this point, in his answer to Mr. Mar- 
cy's letter ; and is now clearly of opinion that two descriptions of 
loans were supposed to exist : and when I found that the law con- 
tained words limiting tlie allowance to loans obtained on your ficr* 
sonal responsibility , 1 was compelled to notice the distinction. 

I will freely confess my belief, that had the entire committee un- 
derstood, that all the loans had been obtained on a pledge of treasury 
notes, still they would have been witling- to -aHow the premium there- 
on to the extent of the balance against you; their great object, as 
before stated, being to cancel that balance, and release you from the 
responsibility it imposed. And here again, I must be permitted to 
say, that as you distinctly understood the intentions of the committee, 
and of the legislature, it was a most unpardonable want of candor, of 
generosity, and of justice,for you to claim more than was intended to 
be given to you. You know what you had represented the premium 
to be, and your most devoted friend and partizan will hardly justify 
you in claiming more. 

Thus, sir, Ihave stated as summarily as I could, the reasons which 
have influenced me in giving my construction to this law. 

i know you will, as you have done, accuse me of presumption for 
differing from your counsel. You seem all along to have thought it 
incumbent en me, to yield my own judgment to theirs. If it had been- 
a matter of private concern, I might probably have done it : but I 
had supposed that you too well understood the nature of official re- 
sponsibility, to think that in the discharge of my public duty, I was 
not bound to be guided, entirely by the dictates of my own conscience 
and judgment ; and I will say, in the language of my former letter, 
that the considerations T have stated, u if they do not convince you I 
1 am riMit, ought to satisfy you, that it is not clear that I am wrong : 
and it there is any serious doubt in the case, the course of my duty is 
too plain to be .mistaken." My high respect for your counsel, bolti 



Si 

as men and as lawyers, has made me fed great uneasiness in bein^r 
obliged to differ from them, and combat their arguments ; in doing 
which, however, I have only followed the dictates of conscience : 
and I cannot but here declare my solemn conviction, that had I 
yielded myself to your views and pretensions, they would pronounce 
me either a fool or a knave. , 

I will now proceed to. notice some of your remarks, which may re- 
quire attention, although they do not appear to have much bearing 
on the real merits of the question between us. 

With respect to the complaint which you make, that I have not yet. 
returned to you certain vouchers demanded by you in October, 18l8 y 
I observe that they were sent to Washington, as I have before in- 
formed you Inconsequence, however, of your letter of that date, 
the agent of the state for settling with the United States, was imme- 
diately written to, to return the vouchers thus called for, as speedily 
as possible. I here subjoin an extract from his answer, dated at 
Washington city, October 27, lbl8. 

" The accounts and vouchers are all deposited in the war depart- 
fl ment, and have been partially acted upon. The account of the 
*'_ state against the United States referring to the vouchers, has been 
64 stated and rendered^ and neither can with propriety be withdrawn 
u or altered." 

" It appears from the partial examination given to the account, 
" that many sums allowed by you and credited to the vice presi- 
tt dent, had been previously allowed and passed to his credit at the 
u war department The vice president can doubtless explain the 
** cause of this inadvertance. But it is obvious, that before the ex- 
a planation can be made, all the accounts must be examined here, 
'« It is equally obvious, that no item can be considered as absolutely 
** carried to the credit of the vice president, until it is ascertained 
" that it has not been allowed at the war department ; that you can 
" not make an exhibit to the commissioners, nor can they act sooner; 
st and that if the vice president's request be complied with, I must 
" withdraw all trie vouchers and return to Albany." 

These vouchers would have been returned before now, however,. 
were it not that some few had been merely suspended by the audi- 
tors of the treasury department, not rejected, and may therefore, yet 
be allowed to the state, and if so, then to you. 

You say, that before the commissioners, I denied no part of " your 
" statements, objected to none of the documents produced, nor to the 
"principles contended for as applicable to them." There was one 
part of your statements which, I presume, you will allow I denied, 
viz. the loss of vouchers at my office. Iadeed you had not the hardi- 
Jhood then to make this charge seriously — you merely hinted at it ; 
and if I mistake not, the commissioners considered it altogether ridic- 
ulous. As to your statements relating to matters not appertaining to 
my office — such as your exchanging useless muskets for those that 
were good, &c &c. I knew nothing, and could therefore neither de- 
ny nor affirm as to their correctness. As to the principles contended 
for, it was not for me to give an opinion, and so I informed youy 



32 

when you requested me to transmit the report of the commissioners 
to the legislature, accompanied by a strong* recommendation of the 
principles adopted by them, and which you had the goodness to 
draw up for me. I informed you, on that occasion, that the legis- 
lature had placed the settlement of your accounts in the hands of the 
commissioners, and that it was for them to recommend principles of 
settlement, and not for me ; and I accordingly transmitted the report 
without expressing an opinion 

You say you submitted to the committee the following' propositions r 

T. t; That a law be passed, authorizing the comptroller to adjust 
" the account, according to the decision of a jury, in an amicable suit 
u to be instituted, by the verdict of which you offered to abide." 

2. " That the legislature should appoint any three arbitrators they 
" might think proper, and pass an act, authorising the comptroller 
" to settle the account finally according to the award.*' 

That you spoke of one or both of these propositions by way of 
shewing to the committee your confidence in the justice of your 
claims, I have some recollection ; but that you formally made any 
such proposition, 1 do not believe. You made three propositions,; 
which were. : 

1. That provision should be made authorising a settlement of your 
accounts on the principles recommended by the commissioners, and 
to indemnify you against responsibilities on account of arms belong- 
ing to the United States in our state arsenals. 

2. That the comptroller should be required, on the final adjust 
ment of your accounts with the state, to allow you a credit of 
.§509-923,* stated by you to be the value of arms, ammunition and 
other military stores, maintained by you to be then in the possession 
of the state, and for which, you said, you were liable. 

3. That provision should be made requiring the commissary of 
military stores to deliver you the arms, &c. belonging to the United 
States, for which you were accountable. And 1 think you prepared 
t.he. draught of an act in each of the three cases. 

I do not state the propositions from memory; but from a paper 
returned to me by Mr. Davis, the chairman of the committee. The 
committee, after hearing your propositions and arguments, parted ; 
after placing in my hands your memorandum*. They either re- 
ducsted me to show the effect of the first proposition, if passed into a 
law, or I did it without such a request : for 1 find by the said paper 
returned to me by Mr. Davis, that I staled the said three proposi- 
tions, and added a calculation as to the probable effect of the first, 
if adopted. 

The committee had met two or three times, before I was desired 
io call on you. It was after they had singled out the item of pre- 
mium, and determined to reject ail your other claims, that I was 
requested to call on you; and then, not, as you say, for the purpose, 
of ascertaining whether you would not relinquish, as against the 

* The \ aim- of these arms, Lc. was variously stated by you : first at this sum, then m 
»hoi!l $400,000— *and it) your schedule, accompanying the case for your counsel 



it'ate; your pay, expenses of command and journeys, losses, &c. &'c. 
but to ioibrm you of the decision of the committee, as to their ad- 
mission of the item of premium, and their rejection of the commis- 
sions on your expenditures for the state and the United States. Af- 
ter you took your final leave of the committee, I inquired of them, if 
it was understood whether you were to be allowed your charges for 
expenses at New- York, expenses of journeys, &c. They told me 
they bad no particular understanding about it, and that I had better 
speak to you. I therefore followed you, and overtook you descend- 
ing the stairs of the capitol, and requested to know your views of 
the subject. I mentioned this to the committee, and then to you, in 
order to save subsequent difficulties in the settlement of the account, 
and to prevent the drawing of any money out of the treasury, and 
at all events, not more than the difference between 8120,000, the 
supposed balance cf your account, and the amount of the premium at 
12 per cent., the highest rate at which you estimated it. You con- 
sented to relinquish those charges, and I then supposed that no pos- 
sible difficulty could arise to prevent a settlement of accounts that 
had given me infinite distress and trouble. 

Some few days after the passage of the act, you had prepared, 
what you called your '*' final abstract.'' This you brought to my 
office, and desired me to examine it with you. I did so, and de- 
monstrated that several items therein, were palpably erroneous, and 
unjustly charged, and you drew your pen across the charges. Many 
others! believed so, but I could not determine positively as to them, 
without reference to accounts and vouchers that would require time* 
These were marked for examination at leisure~and we thus passed 
through the account. What yoH mean by saying that you called at 
my office, and struck from your account 6i all the charges for pay, 
expenses of command and journeys, and agreed to waive losses, com- 
missions, interest, &c w I cannot conceive. I can perceive nothing 
in what passed between us on this occasion, like the fanciful story 
vou have told of the fulfilment of the stipulations of a treaty on your 
part ; nothing like a -voluntary relinquishment of any charge It 
looks more (as it really was) Wee a relinquishment of demands, that 
you could not m any event, or under any circumstances, be entitled 
to make. 

You say, that finding, after the passage of the law, that the pre- 
mium " was greater than was anticipated," and unwilling to receive 
any thing under the act beyond the intention of the legislature, you 
had, " to meet the liberality of that body with a corresponding spirit 
on your part; voluntarily withdrawn receipts and vouchers to a large 
amount, advanced to commissaries, and others, part of which bad 
been suspended, and part arbitrarily rejected" by me, as you are 
pleased to assert. Did you ever intimate to me, sir, that the premium 
was greater than had been anticipated, and that for that reason yon 
would withdraw any vouchers or charges ? You never did, nor did 
you withdraw to my knowledge a single item, that I did not compel 
you to withdraw, by showing you most clearly and unequivocally 
tha-t you were not entitled to it. Pray what were these ** receipts' 

5 



34 

and vouchers to a lavgfc amount advanced to Commissaries and oth* 
ers" that you withdrew? point them out, and I will pledge myself 
to demonstrate that your pretence is unfounded. 

You say that " a deeper scrutiny into the papers with which you 
" have furnished me, with comparisons of your official reports from 
te time to time, afford ample conviction of the fallibility of your de- 
<e cisions, and confirmation to me that I have suffered Heavily, not 
" only by the loss of vouchers from your office, but from inaccuracies 
<* and omissions in the final audit and settlement of my accounts.'' 

That I am as fallible as any other man, I never had the presump- 
tion to deny. But one of the instances which follows the above ex- 
tract from your letter will, I fear, only again expose you to censure 
for not stating: it correctly. You 2*0 on to observe, that " at the foot 
u of an account rendered from your office, which was carried into 
" the general account current of 6th March, 18 18, and constitutes 
" part of the balance of $197,297.64 is the following remark :" 
a Of this balance of g 1 39,537-54, it appears that Governor Tomp- 
kins has paid out on unsettled contracts $5,928.88 as follows : 
« 1809 Sept. 7, To Simeon Frisbie, g600 
" 1810, Feb. 10, To do 630 

" Oct. 3, To do 160.77 

" Nov. 30, To do 340 



a 



a 



1,750.77 



a 



1808, Nov. 2, To John M'Lean, as before 

noted, - 923.11 

<c 1811, Mar. 12, To do 2,500 

" Mar. 14, To Russel Attwater, 750 

— % 

85,923.88 

iC And yet? in your list of disallowances of the same date, are these 

very item's rejected as having been allowed to me years before. 
<c They now form part of the amount withdrawn by me." 

Now with respect to these advances to Simeon Frisbie, I assert- 
thcit the whole amount has been fiassed to your credit. Tftese ad- 
vances amount to $1,750.77, and with a further advance made by 
you of §500, to Mr. Frisbie, (see voucher no. 85 of abstract no. 9, 
Assembly Journal, 1819, page 241,} make $2,250.77, paid to him. 
He has produced vouchers of expenditures amounting to g 1,967.59, 
which have been /laxsed to your credit , (see voucher 83 of abstract 9, 
same journal, page 487,) leaving; ,$283.18 suspended, and this amount 
($283,18) was fiassed to your credit on the 27th of August last, un- 
der the law of the last session. See appendix D, abstract*(b,) sub- 
abstract 9, voucher 85. 

Again — The above mentioned advances to John McLean, you stated 
tome last April yon did not claim ; and in the memorandum tiled in 
my office, of advances to Mr. McLean claimed by you, the above 
mentioned two sums are not found. You had the whole of the ad- 
vances to him claimed by you in your final abstract, passed to your 
credit on the 27th August last. 

Again — The advance to Russet Att water, above mentioned, being 



85 

$r50, is not passed to your credit, because you did not ^ claim it in 
your said final abstract, now on liie in my office, and wjjtt h you in* 
tended for a complete statement of what you thought ought to be 
passed to your credit. 

It follows clearly that the advances to Mr Frisbie, cannot, with 
any justice be claimed by you, and that your schedule A, in which 
you say they are now comprised, w so far defective. The advances 
to Mr. M'Lean too, beino; dated in 1808 and 18 1 1, you are in no 
wise entitled to, having: repeatedly stated that all your^ accounts with 
him were settled up to I8t3, and these advances not appearing in the 
list of sums paid by you to him and delivered to me last April. 

It appears that an account of expenses in effecting an Indian treaty 
of S^,20u, had been audited in June, 1812, and inadvertently laid by, 
without passing its amount to your credit ; and that the omission was 
not discovered and rectified until this year. This circumstance, it is 
riot af all surprising, that you should magnify, it being the only in- 
stance of a mistake to your disadvantage. Whenever an account 
was audited, you were invariably furnished with a copy of it as set- 
tled, so as to put it in your power to detect omissions, if any existed. 
The public will duly estimate this wonderful discovery of yours, and 
the use you make of it. 

Immediately after passing over the items of your "final abstract" as 
stated above, you commenced a conversation about the premium, 
and how its rate was to be ascertained ; and in the course of that 
conversation you said something indicating that the premium was to 
be claimed on loans secured by the hypothecation of treasury notes. 
I mentioned to you that I did not believe the act would authorize the 
allowance. You contended that it would ; the point was argued un- 
til the hour of dinner arrived, when we parted without producing 
conviction on either side. 

That evening, or the next morning before I went to the office, I 
called on Mr. Van Vechten. (as the attorney-general, Mr. Van Bu- 
ren, was from home,) and solicited his opinion as to the construction 
of the act. He unhesitatingly told me, that, in his opinion, my con 
struction was the true one, and that he had mentioned to some one 
in the senate, when the bill was under consideration, that he thought 
it would not answer the object intended by its friends. As soon as I 
saw you again, I informed you of my interview with Mr Van Vech- 
ten. You proposed my taking and abiding by the opinion of the at- 
torney-general. I had, however, by this time, reflected so much on 
the act, and knowing, as I thought I did, the real object of the le- 
gislature in passing it,' and haying, moreover, just learned that you 
had declared the premium to be 24 per cent., I determined not to 
submit the question to his decision. I had come to a positive con- 
clusion in my qwn mind, as to. what was my duty ; and to, have yield- 
ed that conviction, if the attorney general had thought differently on 
the subject, I could not have been justified in it, to the public nor to 
my own conscience. I told you that this was a question of great mo- 
ment to you as well as to the state, and that the ordinary rule of a 
submission to the attorney general ought not to be applied in the pre- 
sent case. The opinion of the attorney general, in all cases, as you 
well know, is by way of advice merely, and never binding. I pro- 



Six 

posed a submission to the judges of the supreme court ; and not, as 
you say, to judges Spencer and Van Ness ; and your declaration that 
I expressed a willingness to leave the question to those two gentle- 
men, or that I ever intimated a wish to make such a reference, excites 
my astonishment. I declare most solemnly, that I never expressed 
a wish that the question should be submitted to those two judges, 
alone, and that the remarks and reasons, which you say you assigned 
on that occasion, against such a! reference, are entirely fabricated. 
Your declaration too, that I then consented to take the opinion of the 
attorney general, is equally unfounded in truth. If I had done so, 
why did you propose to leave it to the decision of private individu-^ 
als, a list of whom you delivered to me. • 

You say, that as I had referred to Mr. Van Vechten, " in support 
of my doubts" as to the construction of the law, you applied to that 
gentleman with your case, and he gave an opinion in direct contra- 
diction to that which il I had imputed to him .*." And when we called 
on bim together, you say, he told me ihat the verbal opinion which 
he hacT given me, was "founded on the statement t made to him ;" 
and you accuse me of making a statement to him which was incor- 
rect in the detail of facts. There is no part of your letter more utter- 
ly destitute of truth than this. 

I called on Mr. Van Vechten in April ; presented him with a copy 
of the act; asked his opinion, and stated to him the general question 
relative to the ad, which we had been discussing. He told me, after 
perusing the act, that, " according to his information, some of the, 
loans , though formally made upon your responsibility, were in fact hot* 
tomed upon pledges of treasury notes, ivhich had been advanced to you 
by the United States for the purposes oftlte war-— and that it appeared to 
him, you could have no just claim to a premium in such cases :" and 
this information and belief Mr. Van Vechten had when the law was 
before the senate, and then entertained and expressed the same opin- 
ion. You see, sir, that I have imputed no opinion to Mr. Van Vech- 
ten which he did not expressly give me : That I made no statement 
of facts at all :. that I said not one word about the nature of your 
"contracts for Joans," for I knew nothing of them. You never fur- 
nished me with them till August, as you say yourself. The general 
question between us was well understood, and upon that the opinion 
Mr. Van Vechten gave jne coincided exactly with my own. I still 
think that when the loans were"i?i fact bottomed" upon the pledge 
of treasury notes furnished you by the government, you are not enti- 
tled to the premium, and that this is in truth the case with the loans 
on which you claim the premium, and emphatically with that of the 
corporation of New- York. 

I do not complain of Mr. Van Vechten for now entertaining a dif- 
ferent opinion. I presume he did not consider the subject so ma- 
turely as he afterwards did. But I complain of you for attempting 
to impose on the public a belief that I had " surprised him into the 
expression of an hasty opinion founded upon an incorrect statement." 
I have written to Mr. Van Vechten on this subject, and you will find 
his answer in the appendix marked (L.) Read it and be convinced 
oF your error. 



37 , 

In reference to my application to Mr Van Vechten, you are pleas- 
$d to say, that I could not state an accurate case on which to obtain 
opinions, because " it depended on documents not in my fiossession 
until the 2d August. Is it not a little strange, if not rediculous, that 
you should now say that you had not furnished me with the docu- 
ments necessary to enable me to judge of the true construction of 
the act until August, and that you should at the same time constant- 
ly express your surprise, that I should doubt about it in April ? 

Tou say you .had previously yielded your assent to my applying 
for the chancellor's opinion. S® far were you from yielding such 
assent, that you positively declined the proposition when I made and 
pressed it upon you. The truth is, that I had, by this time, made 
the following propositions to you, all of which you refused, and as- 
signed as your principal reasons, others far different than those you 
are now pleased to avow. I proposed, 

1. A reference to all the judges of the supreme court, 

2. To the judges and chancellor, 

3. To the judges, chancellor, and attorney general, (Mr. Van Bu- 
reu,) 

4. To the chancellor, chief justice, and attorney general, (Mr. Van 
JBuren,) 

5. To the chancellor and any two of the judges. 

As you refused all these, and as I was still anxious that a settle- 
ment with you should be made, and that the account which had given 
me so uiueh trouble and vexation, might be for ever closed, I thought 
of a reference to the chancellor. I immediately called on him, and 
begged to know whether he would not decide between us. He an- 
swered in substance (as I understood) that if fre did, we must submit 
the question in writing and agree to abide by his decision. I inferred 
from this (perhaps incorrectly) that he w r ould consent to decide. I 
then without delay called on you, and proposed a reference to him. 
You remarked that he would not serve, that you were sure he would 
not. I then informed you, that I had just left him, and that although 
he had not absolutely engaged to decide, yet he had given me reason 
to hope he would. You then raised another objection, viz. thatj'Ou 
had heard he had sojd something in relation to the act, whilst before 
the council of revision, that you did not like, and you declined this 
proposition, as you had done all the others. 

To convince the public of the true state of this case, I wrote to 
the chancellor since the receipt of your letter, inquiring as to the 
substance of the conversation with him, and I have been obligingly 
favored with his answer; from which it clearly appears, that I had 
the interview with hirn as related above, and that my statement of it 
is substantially correct. Will any man, then, believe that you assent- 
ed to a reference to him ? If so, why did we not afterwards call on 
him ? Copies of my letter to the chancellor, and of his answer mark- 
ed (M & N) will be found annexed. 

I admit that I never thought of the mandamus, until after the last 
interview we had before our negotiations ended. Whether your re- 
marks in that interview suggested the idea of the mandamus, or 
whether some other circumstance suggested it, is not material. You 
thirik they chd. I made the proposition to you to apply to the su- 



3.8 

perne court, then in session, for a mandamus against me, as the me* 
thod which I thought, of all others, the most proper to decide the 
great question then in dispute between us. There is nothing: to re- 
gret on my part, for making that proposition to you, except that I did 
not think of a course, so obviously proper, when the difficulty first 
arose. It was the most proper of all the propositions that were made. 
And why it was rejected, it you entertained so good an opinion of 
the legality and equity of your claims, as you vyould wish us to be- 
lieve you did, is inconceivable. In your letter to me of the 6th of 
August last, you doubted wkether a mandamus would lie in the case. 
Could you liave doubted tkat, when you now say that you first sug- 
gested it ? why then -did you not agree to it? if you had no confi- 
dence in th« supreme court, you might have carried their decision to 
the court of errors, and befor* this time, you might have had the de- 
cision of the highest court in the state. 

You say, that at the time I urged you to leave the question to cer- 
tain of the judges, I " did express a decided opinion that, under the 
il circumstances, it would not be proper to call on certain others ; ,s 
and the reason which you say I assigned, was, that I (i had already 
" consulted one of them ex parte on the subject fl and as to the other, 
you say that you tbmk I added, that I " had either consulted one. 
*i other, or knew his opinion." I am constrained to say, as I did in 
substance on a former occasion, that all this is' utterly unfounded : 
and I cannot believe that Mr. Betts could have s© far misunderstood 
my language, as to support you in this statement What I said in 
my former letter on this subject, was the real truth, and to that \ 
refer. 

I cannot here omit the mention of a circumstance, which now is of 
no other importance, than merely to give the public another insight 
into your character. Some two or three days before owr negotia- 
tions ended, you stated, that if I decided against you, I must be sen- 
sible that it would be necessary for us to open an official correspond- 
ence, to be laid before the legislature; and that you would then pro- 
pose, in order that there should be no misunderstanding as to facts, 
that we should have a meeting with two of the friends of each, and 
have a perfect understanding as to all the fact* having any relation 
to the subject in controversy. I said I had no objection, but that I 
could not conceive there would be any difference as to facts. After 
our negotiations ended, instead of intimating to me, agreeably to your 
own proposition, that you desired a meeting, and that I should attend 
with my friends, you came into my private office in company with 
Mr. Betts, and after first insulting me, by alleging that 1 had at length 
brought the affair to the point I had always intended, or wished, 
proceeded to make some inquiries. I did not think that this was the 
interview which you had proposed to have with " two oflhe friends 
of each," and probably I might not have entered so fully into an ex- 
planation of all ihe circumstances, as was necessary to enable Mr. 
Betts, or any other gentleman, who had never known what had been 
said before between us, fully to understand the true import of my an- 
swers to questions, which, it would now appear, were prepared by you 



39 

4for the occasion. However, it so happened, that you took a nfan of ho- 
nor with you : and although I did not explain some circumstances as 
fuUy as J ought to have done, or could have wished, I am yet to learn^ 
whether enough was not said, to prevent a misunderstanding of the 
facts by Mr. Belts. 

You represent me as saying, " I wish to God I had taken the at- 
" torney general's opinion in the first instance !" I never said so. 
You more than once said, .that I had greatly erred in not taking the 
opinion of the attorney general ; that tins error (as you called it) had 
produced the difficulties under which I laboured. I told you, that 
had I referred the matter to him, I might perhaps thereby have re- 
lieved myself from the heavy responsibility that I was under. That 
was what I said, and not what you ascribe to me. 

The story you tell about my suggesting to you, to take the opinion 
of the present attorney general, and the replies you represent your- 
self as having made, are altogether discoloured. That I made the 
suggestion, barely made it, I will admit. But how did J make it, and 
Under what circumstances ? You told me more than once, that Mr. 
Oakley must, in April last, have given precisely the same construc- 
tion to the act that you contended for ; that the amendments he ha& 
proposed to the bill in the assembly, plainly evidenced this. As your 
had repeatedly brought this to my notice, with the view, no doubt, 
of influencing me to yield to your construction, I at length suggested 
to you, that it might be easily ascertained what his opinion really 
was. You then expressed great surprise that I should think of ma- 
king such a proposition to you. I informed you that I had not in- 
tended it as a proposition ; that I merely suggested it, and that I 
had done so, in consequence of your own repeated declarations as to 
Mr. Oakley's opinion. 

Did you notion more occasiens than one, ask me, whether 1 could 
think of acting so indecorously, as to take the opinion of th<* present 
attorney general, after having declined to take the opinion of his pre- 
decessor ? Pray, sir, will you pretend to say, that there was no re- 
monstrance in questions of that sort ? I never intended to take his 
opinion. But had I so intended, I repeat again, that your remon- 
strances against that course, would have shown me that such a step 
would have been wholly useless. You appeal to Mr. Betts to con- 
firm your statement in this respect. I did not, perhaps, before him, 
relate all the circumstances attending the suggestion relative to Mr. 
Oakley, yet I am very sure he will never say that I admitted the 
correctness of the statement in your letter. 

Much of the foregoing detail of circumstances might perhaps have 
been omitted. It can evidently be of little conseqirence in the deci- 
sion of the real merits of the question between you and the state, which 
of us is most correct in our recollection of the various conversations 
we have had, in the course of our attempts to settle' your accounts. 
After all we can say on this branch of the subjeet, the public will no 
doubt revert to the true points on which the whole must depend ; 
namely, the true situation of your accounts with the state, and the 
fair and legal construction of the law, under which you claim so large 



40 

ft sum of money from the treasury. I shall, therefore, irow proceed 
to consider the only remaining subject of }^our letter which strikes 
me as being of any importance, to wit : — your attempt to induce .the 
public to believe, that you are not a defaulter to the state, independ- 
ent of any allowance you claim under the law, and that really the 
State is indebted to you in the sum of more than $20,000. 

I confess my astonishment at the boldness of this attempt to im- 
pose on the public. After having so often admitted to me, that there 
would be a large balance against you : after hearing me state to the 
joint committee, that that balance would be about Si 20,000: after 
assenting to the ireneral correctness of that estimate, ('according to 
Mr. Bacon,*) and never (according to Mr Davis*) denying t hut there 
nvould be, in.any event, a large balance against you : After the pas* 
sage of the law avowedly for the purpose of enabling you to extin- 
guish that balance; and even after crediting you with the whole of 
the g56,756.45, (the vouchers for which you pretend to have been 
lost,J there still remaining a balance against you of near S70,000: I 
say, after all this, that you should attempt to make the public believe, 
that you are not in fact a defaulter, rs, I repeat, matter of utter as- 
tonishment. Yet you have done it in the statement of your account 
annexed to your letter. It becomes my duty, then, to examine this 
statement, and I think I shall be able to show it utterly fallacious and 
deceptive. 

You represent the amount of money received by you out of the 
treasury at $1,075,021.72 which is correct: but you have forgotten 
to mention that you received six thousand dollars in addition thereto, 
from the United States. That sum was expended in certain fortifi- 
cations near the city of New York, for which you have received cre- 
dit on my books. But as it was conceived that the United States 
ought to pay it, you applied to them for the money, and they paid it 
to you. You have therefore not only had the amount passed to your 
credit in your accounts with the state, but have also received the 
money from the United States. That you did receive it will proba- 
bly not be denied, because you have acknowledged it in your " final 
account" delivered to me last spring, and now on file in my office, 
wherein you charge yourself in the following terms: " To whole 
e amount of warrants on the slate treasury, from the commencement 
6i of his administration, and other debits, including 6,000 dollars, re- 
* ceived by him from the United States as a return of an advance by 
if the commissioners of fortifications. §1,081,021 •ffa.'* 

Now in making out your account with the state in your letter, 
where was the necessity of concealing this 6,000 dollars ? 1 reminded 
you of it in my letter to you with the final audit of your accounts, 
dated 28th August, 1819- 

Again — In the statement of your account (appendix A of your let- 
ter) you give yourself credit '• by amount disbursed by him in the 
public service and allowed by the comptroller from 1807 to 22nd 
February,! 8 17, inclusive S955,392.22." The total amount for which 
I have given you credit in my statement of your account current (see- 

* See the letters of these gentlemen, in the Appendix marked B and C, 



41 

assem. jour. 1819, page 489) is $877,724^ to which add the te- 
ther sums of $6,855 T \% (in pa^e 470) and $79-60 i T \\ (amounting 
together to $86,456,44) passed to your credit the 27th August,1819, 
("see account current in the appendix D) and the whole amount passed 
to your credit is $964,1 8<)JL 2 o being gS788 T 3 ^ more than you have 
credited yourself with. How comes it that 1 have given you more 
credit for expenditures than you had given yourself ? I will bring it 
to your notice. $7-970 t Vtt of this excess, .consists of charges which 
I had allowed and passed to your credit, and which, when sent on 
by me to Washington for collection of the general government, were 
found to have been previously charged by you to that government, 
and passed to your credit, being duplicate receipts, 51 in number. 
You thus got credit both of the United States, and of this state, for 
the same expenditures, (see abstract a, in appendix D.) The residue 
of the excess consists of gl 17, which I had iivice passed to your cre- 
dit notwithstanding my vigilance, (see voucher 109 of abstract 6> as- 
sembly journal 1819 page 479 and voucher 51 of abstract 8, page 
484) and of §700.81 which I had allowed and passed to your credit, 
the charges for which were disallowed by the United States audit- 
ors, because they were illegal, or not admissible against the general 
government, (see same appendix.) These I have not absolutely re- 
jected in your accounts, but only suspend' d 

Now if you add the above sums together, you will find they a- 
mount to $8,788,30 which is the amount for which I have given you 
credit, more than you have credited yourself with, in the statement 
of your account in your letter. Why you suppressed all mention of 
your having received credits for the same thing from both govern* 
ments, I shall not at this moment inquire. 

I will here mention, that a great number of charges made by yon 
against the state, in addition to the above, and which I have passed 
to your credit, have been disallowed or suspended by the officers of 
the United States treasury, because they are charges not admissible 
by the laws of the United States, though perhaps, they were neces- 
sarily incurred. Presuming that the slate intended to allow you ail 
bonaf.de actual payments, which you have made, though not strictly 
legal when they were made, these charges, amounting to many thou- 
sand dollars, still stand to your credit on the books of my office, tho' 
probably the state will lose them. The certificate of the third aud- 
itor of the treasury department is here referred to, to prove what I 
say. It may be seen at my office, being too voluminous to be pub- 
lished. 

To proceed with the examination of the account as stated by you 
in the appendix to your letter. You next credit yourself with §56- 
756_4_5_ f or vouchers rendered to me in 1813, and not then credited, 
and 'not returned to you. This item of your account, as connected 
with the supposed loss of your vouchers, I reserve for a distinct ex- 
amination hereafter. 

The third item in your statement of the account is $'71,972 T 5 „V 
with which you credit yourself, for vouchers to that amount sus- 
pended or disallowed by me, which are held by you as charge? 

6 



.42 

against the state, being: included in the list of vouchers returned to 
you 4th November, 181S. 

As you have not thought proper to mention these vouchers parti- 
cularly, so that T could examine the list above mentioned ; arid as 
you state them^o be independent of those suspended in the audit of 
your account on the 27th August last, in which audit you had credit 
for all the charges claimed by you in your final abstract , delivered t& 
me in April, 1819, except $14,207-79 to be noticed presently ; and as 
the vouchers returned to you on the 4th November,1818j and not al- 
lowed to you on the 2?th August, 1819, must necessarily consist for 
the most part of charges which never can be allowed under any cir- 
cumstances, yon will excuse me if I presume that the item now in 
question, is one which you will probably never think of presenting 
against the state, as actual claims; and that nothing but the great 
amount of it ($71.97-2.5 induced you to set it down in your state- 
ment of the account. The various items which compose this large 
sum consist of advances to John McLean (which you have disclaimed 
in your final abstract J of double charges, of private charges, and of 
other equally inadmissible charges, which never can be allowed. 

It is much to be regretted, that you did not state the items com- 
posing: the $71,972.51, which, you say, 1 had suspended or rejected 
without sufficient reasons ; and that you had not permitted Messrs. 
Thompson, Morris, Murray, and Leake, to examine the abstracts in 
your possession, showing the reasons for suspension and rejection, 
before they stated and certified } r our account. Had you done so, 
and had they stated the items, and their reasons why they ought to 
be allowed to you; or had they stated generally, that they had se- 
lected vouchers to the amount of $7t>972.51, which they believed I 
had disallowed without good cause; their certificate would be entit- 
led to great consideration and weight. As it is, it appears to me that 
the procuring and publication of their certificate and account, such 
as they are, is, on your part, a shameful attempt to impose on the 
community. What, permit me to inquire, does their certificate 
amount to? They express no opinion as to the legality, propriety, 
ox equity of a single item. They simply say, li And we do further 
i{ certify, that we have examined a list of vouchers, purporting to 
" have been returned to the said Daniel D. Tompkins, by the said 
" comptroller, on the 4th November, 18 18 ; and find therein various 
V items not noticed irr the final account audited by the comptroller, 
" as existing charges in the same, but which are held by the said 
" Daniel D. Tompki?is, as cfaims against the state, and that the 
" same amount to &7l,972 T 5 oV" A nd these gentlemen are equally 
guarded, and very correctly too, in their certificate relating to the 
5814,207.79 suspended by me on the last audit of your accounts. 

Your vouchers, it appears, must have peculiar and extraordinary 
properties. In one part of your argument you use them to prove your* 
self a creditor of the state: in another, to show that I had made an 
ungenerous and unkind use of them, by representing you as charging 
to the state vouchers that were improper, after you had withdrawn 
them. 



Theji-nal abstract, which has been several times mentioned, is an 
abstract of all the suspended and disallowed iiems in your <iccount, 
which yon professed to hold against the state, after the passage of the 
law for the settlement of your accounts. This you delivered to me 
last April, together with an abstract of sundry additional charges, 
which you had not before presented against the state. In August 
last, I took up your accounts and completed the audit of them, allow- 
ing: you most of the charges contained in the two abstracts above 
mentioned, and suspending or rejecting the rest. The amount allow- 
ed, and passed to your credit, was $8f>,456 T 4 /o including the $2,200 
jbr Indian expenses, which had been omitted in former accounts. 
This left a balance against you, of $t J9,b29 T 5 oV to which ought to 
be added the $6000 received by yon from the United States, for forti- 
fications erected in the city of New- York, as before explained, mak- 
ing the whole balance due from you $t25,629 T V<r' 

From this balance is to be deducted, if hereafter allowed,the amount 
of ihe vouchers suspended in the last audit of your account, being 
.gl4.207.79, making the fourth and last item of the credits in your 
statement of the account. 

In this view of the account, the result is very different from what 
it appears according to your statement of it. If there be an error in 
it, let it be pointed out, and it shall be immediately rectified. 

In speaking of the army of Niagara, and of your exertions to save 
it, you say in a note, " It is not the least mortify ins: circumstance of 
" these transactions, that my charge for Col. Yates* expenses in 'his 
" important service, remains to this day one of the suspended items 
" of my account." I aver that this is wholly untrue. When you. 
wrote that note, you either knew, or ought to have known, and might 
have known, that the charge for Col. Yates' expenses had long since 
been allowed by me, and passed to your credit. The voucher for it 
is No. 168, of abstract No. 6, (see assembly journal, 1819, page 481,) 
and was reported by me to the legislature, among the charges in your 
account which had been allowed. Yet for this I have been abused 
in the newspapers devoted to you, which are ready to seize on any 
thing to calumniate me, at the expense of all justice and truth. But 
I will state to you in what manner your mistake has probably arisen. 
In your voucher No. 57, of abstract No. 5, (see assembly journal of 
1819, page 475,) you have charged $493 16, as paid to Col Yates 
for artillery caissons This charge was allowed by me, and passed 
to your credit But the duplicate of that voucher ivas also charged by 
you to the state, and rejected by me as a double charge, (see voucher 
L, of abstract No. 5, assembly journal of 1819, page 224.) This re- 
jected voucher was probably in your mind, when you wrote the above 
mentioned note. And without the least examination, you published 
it to the world as an instance of my severity. Let men be cautious 
how they believe your statements. I invite every one to a strict ex- 
amination of the documents to which I refer. 

I proceed now to the consideration of the subject of your lost 
vouchers. 

You have not in terms charged me with the zinlfitl suppression of 



~T- 



44 

your vouchers; but I believe that you intended to produce indirectly 
that impression on the public mind. As this is a charge of the> most 
serious kind, I shall enter into a full examination of it, and if in the 
course of the inquiry, certain facts and circumstances, should now, 
for the first time, be made public, the disclosure of which must be very 
unpleasant to you, 1 can only regret that you have forced me into 
the measure, by preferring charges against me of such magnitude, as 
to make it necessary to defend my own character at the expense oi 
yours. 

After stating that you had detached a large body of metv in the 
public service in the campaign of 1812, you proceed in the following 
■words: " In the early part of the next winter session of the legisla- 
" ture, resolutions were passed in the Assembly, calling on me to re- 
" port, not only the accounts and vouchers for the distribution of 
Ci munitions belonging to the state, but of the expencfrture of the 
rt monies entrusted to me by the national government. They also 
" called on you to report, a detailed statement of monies drawn from 
** the treasury by virtue of the act further to provide for the defence 
*' of the frontiers, passed 12th June, 1812, and of the expenditure 
u thereof, according to the vouchers returned and filed in your office. 
<{ For the monies received from the United States, and their expendi- 
il ture, I was not accountable to the assembly, nor had they any 
c * right to make such call on me, but as a majority of that body was 
" decidedly opposed to the war, and to the prosecution of it : as the 
iX council of appointment, and most of the officers appointed by them, 
" were of the same political character; and as I stood nearly alone 
" in the government, I thought it best for the interests of my cbuntry, 
" to yield my own rights and comply with all their resolutions." 

(l The original vouchers and bonds for munitions and other public 
rt property, were transmitted by special message, with a request 
rt that they should be returned to me. No legislative measures 
& were founded upon this message and these documents, but the 
Ci bonds and -vouchers disappeared, and have never since been found 
** or returned to meP 

Why you sent the original bonds and vouchers to the house, (un- 
less indeed you had duplicate vouchers, in which case the loss of 
those sent, if they were lost, could never injure you) since they did 
not require them ; and why it was necessary for you to state that 
they disappeared, and have never since been found, or returned to 
you, it is out of my power to imagine. I cannot think that you 
would insinuate, that I had any agency in the loss of those vouchers. 
Perhaps you wished to inculpate the legislature, and to show that 
they, as well as I, have made way with your papers, dnd thus de- 
prived you of the opportunity of justifying yourself, and settling your 
accounts. Let it be remembered, that the vouchers thus said to have 
been sent to the assembly, were for munitions, not for money, and 
could, therefore, have no connection with the accounts rendered to 
my office. It is not pretended by you, as I understand, that they 
ever came into my hands. 

The resolution of the assembly, requiring you to report, is in these 



4£ 

words^: 6i Resolved, that his excellency the governor be requested to 
" inform this house, whether any, and what portion of the arms and 
iC munitions of war, belonging; to this state, have been issued, and to 
" whom ; and whether the same have been returned ; and whether 
"any, and what portions thereof have been lost or expended, and 
" what number of arms and what munitions of war belonging to the 
(i state, are now on hand, and where deposited.''* 

To this you replied by sending the information desired, and con- 
cluded your message with requesting a return of such documents as 
should not be necessary to be put on the files of the assembly.! 

I find by a recurrence to the journal of the assembly of that year, 
that your message, with the accompanying documents, whatever 
Xhey were, was referred to a committee, of which William Hender- 
son, Esquire,| of the city of New- York, was chairman. They of 
course passed into his hands. From him. in the ordinary course of 
business, they would have been returned to the clerk of the house, 
James Van Ingen, Esq. of the city of Albany. If these bonds and 
vouchers, then, were suppressed or lost, as you declare, it must be 
attributed to the carelessness or dishonesty of one or both of these 
gentlemen : And now, sir, do you really think that there is a man in 
the state, who knows these gentlemen, who will believe that they are 
either careless or dishonest ? it is enough for me to ask the question. 
The community in which they live, will answer it. 

You say, "'the journals, message, and other evidence of the fact 
" of this loss, were exhibited to the commissioners, to the committee, 
*' and to yourself, on various occasions/* Of the fact of loss, I know 
of no evidence whatever, that you produced : the journals and mes- 
sage surely could not be considered as evidence of that fact, and I 
have no recollection that any other was produced ; nor, I presume, 
will the commissioners or committee recollect any other. You spoke 
much of losses ; but as for proofs in support of your declarations, 
none were produced. 

I utterly deny that I ever admitted, or was ever asked to admit, 
that you had transmitted to my office in 1813, '• vouchers, to a large 
" amount, of various other expenditures for the state, independent of 
i( those called for by the resolutions, and embraced in the report of 
" 2d April, 1813." That some of this description were rendered, is 
probable. For those returned to you, and referred to in my note of 
16th February, 1814- must, I think, have been of this kind. That 
they were so, I infer from the circumstance of their having remained 
behind, when the others on which the report was founded, were de- 
livered up to you. As I shall have frequent occasion to refer to the 
above mentioned report of 2d April, 1813, I annex a copy thereof 
marked (O.) 

You state that the peculiar nature of the call, obliged me, as I sup- 
posed, to separate the vouchers into parcels differing from the ab* 
stracts which you furnished ; and being thus thrown into confusion, 
they remained so till 1814, no part of the accoimts being passed to 
your credit. 

* Assembly Jonn).a.] ? 1§13>, page 42$. t lb. page 5$3 tt> 507. f See Journal, pa§e 516, 



45 

The call of the house did indeed require me, as T understood it, to 
report the amount expended under each different head of appropria- 
tion ; and this was the sense in which I understood the house to call 
for a detailed statement. Your accounts or abstracts not presenting 
them in the form in which I conceived it necessary to report them, I 
\vas obliged to assort and arrange, them anew; and they remained in 
that order till they were taken back by you. 

The compliance with the legislative resolution did not throw your 
vouchers into confusion. I simply, classed them under their proper 
heads of expenditure, which you hachneglected to do. And had they 
been left with me, as they ought to have been, I should uever have 
heard of their being thrown into confusion. 

I deny most positively, that in February, 1814, or at any other pe- 
riod, I requested you to take back your vouchers, or that I said they 
were in such a state of confusion, I did not know what to do with 
them. This declaration of yours, from its entire improbability, car- 
ries its own refutation along with it. For, is it to be conceived, that 
I, whose business it was to arrange vouchers and slate accounts ; that 
I, whose duty it was to afford you every aid in this respect, in my 
power, would make suoh a request ? Can it be supposed that I 
would have requested you (who at the time were pressed with the 
necessary duties 3 T our situation imposed) to take back and arrange 
your accounts and vouchers? Besides, had I not arranged all the 
vouchers under their proper heads of expenditure, to enable me to 
make the report of 2d April, 181S, and having done so, would it 
have afforded me any aid for you to make another arrangement ? On 
the contrary, would I not necessarily have subjected myself to addi- 
tional labour by so doing ? I could not rely on your arrangement 
and classification. It was my duty to ascertain, that you accounted 
for the expenditure of the appropriations distinctly. No legislative 
sanction to a contrary rule then existed. The old and salutary one, 
of accounting for each appropriation distinctly and separately, was 
then in force, even with respect to your accounts, as it always has 
been with respect to all others. 

Instead of doing as you say I did, I recollect most perfectly, that 
in the spring of 1 8 13, shortly after the rising of the legislature, you 
called at my office, and requested a return of the vouchers rendered 
the winter preceding. I was not a little surprised at the request, in- 
asmuch as I had reported to the assembly on these vouchers ; as I 
had spent much time in their classification and arrangement ; and as 
I could not conceive for what purpose they were required. Evea 
now, I cannot conceive any good purpose that the return could have 
answered. I inquired the reason, and you informed me that you 
wished to add such others as remained in your possession, and to ac- 
count fully for the monies drawn by you before that period. I staled, 
that it required then but litlle further labour to complete the exami- 
nation and final audit of the vouchers, and to pass them to your cre- 
dit ; and this would have been done, had they not been withdrawn. 
You still urged your request, and 1, relying then with perfect con- 
fidence on your integrity, permitted them to be withdrawn, after ad- 



47 

djngr. that inasmuch as T had not yet passed them to your credit, there 
Blight not perhap- be any impropriety in my granting your request, 
and they were returned to you, with the exception of the parcel 
which accidentally remained behind until February, 1814. You as- 
sured me that the whole, with your additional accounts and vouch- 
ers, would be very soon returned to my office. This was not attend- 
ed to however, until 18 i6, and then only in part. I did not feel 
perfectly satisfied with myself in having permitted you to withdraw 
the vouchers, and for this reason I thought it my duty to communi- 
cate the fact to the legislature, when next called upon to report on 
your accounts, viz. in the session of 1816, which I did, I find, as 
fellows, as may be seen by the journals of the assembly of that ses- 
sion, page 533. " It is proper to remark, that in the month of Jan- 
" uary or February, 1813, the governo? rendered the accounts and 
" vouchers to this office, of his expenditures under the said act of 
li June 12, 1812: that these accounts were not audited, but that on 
u the 3d April, 1813, the comptroller, in obedience to a resolution 

* of the honourable the assembly, of the 22nd March, then preced- 
u ing, made a report to the house, stating the monies which had 
" been drawn under said act, and also the objects for which they 
*f had been expended, according to the accounts and vouchers ren- 
a dered. And it is proper also to observe, that the governor some 
w time after the rising of the legislature, in the sfiring of 1813, took 
u back the said accounts and vouchers, with the comptroller's ap- 
*' probation, with a view to add a number of additional vouchers to 
" the accounts rendered, and to make a better arrangement of the 
H whole, under the different heads of expenditure provided for by 

* the act." 

Mr. Shippey no doubt called on me in February, 18 14, to see if any 
of your vouchers, rendered the preceding winter, remained still in 
my hands ; but not to bring the whole back to you, as he is now led 
to suppose. His certificate, as published in your letter, is not dated, 
and it must undoubtedly have lately been made, when his recollection 
of the circumstances cannot be otherwise than very indistinct. My 
distinct recollection is, that the vouchers were returned to you, on 
your personal application, in the spring of 1813, and so I reported to 
the legislature in 18(6, as above mentioned. In reference to the fact 
of their loss, however, it is not very material whether they were 
withdrawn by you in 1813, or 14 But I cannot here help remarking, 
that your mode of measuring vouchers by the " basket/' and of judg- 
ing of the amount by the apparent quantity of papers, does not seem 
to comport much with accuracy. 

I take it for granted^that I called at your house in the evening, as 
you say, and as Mr. Shippey certifies; but I have not the slightest 
recollection of the conversation, which you undertake to detail : and 
sure i am, that if any apprehensions had been entertained, or men- 
tioned, at the time, as to a loss of vouchers by me, or in my office- it 
would have made an impression on my mind, that would not now 
have been entirely erased. The vouchers that accompanied my 
»ote of the 1 6th February. 1814 ; must have been, as I stated above, 



48 

of a des6ription not embraced in the call of the assembly, Or in my 
report of the ?nd April, 1813, in obedience to that call. 

That a large portion of the vouchers upon which the report of 2d 
April,, 1813, was made, were missing when Mr, Leake undertook, in" 
the spring of 1815, to examine and arrange them, I can readily con- 
ceive, and that too without admitting the loss of any of them. For 
I have sufficient reason to believe, that you had long before this pe- 
riod charged and rendered them, or a part of them, to the United 
States, in order, I presume, to account for the monies you received 
from that quarter. And this is the reason (of what was at the time, 
and until very lately, a mystery to me) why you requested to with- 
draw, and did actually withdraw your vouchers in the spring of 1813, 
a proceeding which was at the time, so unaccountable. I sincerely 
lament that your conduct should render it a necessary duty to make 
so serious a charge against you; but the circumstances attending 
this transaction force, irresistibly force, the conviction on my mind, 
as it must upon that of every other man, that you withdrew the 
vouchers for the very purpose of enabling you to settle with the Uni- 
ted States. They had answered one purpose in enabling me to re- 
port satisfactorily to the assembly ; and such portion of them as could 
be charged to the United States, with a prospect of being allowed, 
were made use of in that way? and thus answered a second purpose. 

From your representations, it would appear that in February, 1814, 
you thought a large portion of your vouchers, had been lost whilst 
in my possession, and that you were confinsned in this opinion in the 
spring of 1815, after the examination made by Mr Leake. You, 
knew also that I had reported to the legislature in 1816, that the 
\'ouchers had been returned to you in 18 13 — you knew how seriously 
your character was affected by the deficiency in your vouchers. And 
yet you sa}', you " made no complaint, and omitted the public disclo- 
" sure of these losses, until the interview with the commissioners 
" and myself,' 7 last winter, You said not a word to me about the loss ; 
you suffered me to remain in office. You went still farther, you com- 
plimented me last spring before the commissioners, and before the 
]oint committee, for my faithfulness as a public officer. This is most 
extraordinary. The loss, by your account of it now, must have been 
owin^ to gross neglect or fraud on my part, and in either cast 1 , my 
conduct would seem to deserve impeachment or removal from office. 
You however made " no comfilaint." Is all this credible ? It is too 
plain to admit of a moment's doubt, that you knew of no loss occa- 
sioned by my agency, and that you were too well aware of the dis- 
position which had been made of the vouchers by yourself to think 
of charging the loss of them upon me ; until now, at this late period, 
you do it, in order, if possible, to extricate yourself from the dilemma 
into which your errors have led you. 

With respect to what Mr. Leake says, it. ousrht to be remembered, 
that he did not receive the papers from you till the spring of 1815, 
though you had had them returned from my office in the spring of 
?813, according to my account, or in February, 18! 4, according to 
voor own account ; one or two years having thus elapsed between 
your receiving them, and his examining them. He does not pretend 



49 

to say that the papers which he examined, were the whole which I 
returned to you. He could know nothing of that. 

You say, that in the course of the conversation between us on the 
subject of the loss of your vouchers, (page 1 i of your letter Jy ) I admit- 
ted that both myself and my deputy, Mr. Ely, recollected two -vouch' 
ers which had been rendered by you in 1813. and which were not then 
credited to you, or included in any of your subsequent accounts, nor 
were they to be found in my office. This circumstance you strongly 
rely on as evidence of loss of vouchers. 

I well remember the conversation about the two vouchers. I re- 
member calling the fact to your recollection, and stating at the same 
time what the items were, and asking you whether it was not firoba- 
ble, that you had included those items iv vour accounts rendered 'at 
Washington, against the United States. You said that you had not ; 
that the -vouchers were undoubtedly ?nising ; and so you now con- 
tend in your letter, and say that the fact proves the* loss of vouchers. 

You have not stated what those items were; 1 presume we shall 
not differ on this head- They were as follows : 

1. Purchase of cannon ball picked up, and for ammunition, &c. 
taken from the enemy, $131 

2. Purchase of a boat called the Lidustry, and a bark canoe, §303. 
That these were the items so recollected bv Mr Ely and myself, 

(the vouchers for which were so allied by you to be lost.) will ap- 
pear by his certificate, in the appendix marked (P) and it will also 
appear by my report to the legislature in 18 ,S, (also in the appendix 
marked O,) that these two items were included in that report, as 
having been rendered by you to me, and as constituting: a part of 
your expenditures under the act of 12th June, 1812. 1 beg you, sir, 
to note theco facts particularly ; you will see the bearing of them 
directly. 

When last summer you persisted in your unwarrantable claims up- 
on the treasury, and demanded an allowance of three times the a- 
mount ever intended by the legislature, and three times the sum 
which, I sincerely believe, you kuew they intended to allow (see 
page 43) : when by your appeal to the public in your letter, address- 
ed to me, of the 6th of August, I perceived such a manifest want of 
fairness and candor ; such a determination to destroy me for the pur- 
pose of sustaining yourself in the unjust pretensions you had set up, 
I was perfectly satisfied that your allegations, that vouchers had been 
lost or purloined at my office, were mere pretexts: and I then, for 
the first time, determined lo probe the matter, and ascertain, whe- 
ther you had not charged these same vouchers to the United States. 
I accordingly, on the I5ih of September, understanding that Col. 
Pell, the agent of the state for settling its accounts with the United 
States, was about to proceed to Washington, addressed a letter to 
him, which he answered on the 1st of October. Copies of my letter, 
and his answer, will be found in the Appendix marked Q and R. 
From col. Pell's letter it will be seen, that he found the following 
charge made bv you against the United States, viz. in your abstract 
" B, Voucher 306, 

7 



40 

1812, Dec*. '29. Hod Lawrence, fur boat Industry, with 

" her tackle, tyc. complete, gJOO." 

and that this charge was passed to your credit by the general gov- 
ernment. The item S3 for the bark canoe, which was united with 
the charge for the boat Industry, in my report of 2d April, 1813, 
must have been in a voucher separate from that for the boat Indus- 
try, and was not of course entered with that for the boat, but sepa- 
rately in your abstracts against the United States. This is the reason 
why tbe charge for the canoe was not found included with that for 
the boat. 

The remaining sum, viz. &13.1, for purchase of cannon ball picked 
lip, and ammunition, &c. taken from the enemy, was not found by 
Col. Pell, on the examination he made, because 1 had not had it in 
my power to be more specific in my enquiry. This sum is, no doubt, 
made up of several vouchers, and could not, therefore, be found in the 
abstracts at Washington, without a very minute and particular ex- 
amination, and with reference to the names of the individuals to whom 
the payments were made. 

Now, sir, as the charge for the boat Industry, is one of the items re- 
ported to the legislature, by me, in 1813, and brought to your notice 
last spring; and as you then asserted, and now assert, that the 
voucher for it w r as lost, and by me, too, and as it is now found,beyond 
a doubt, that you had charged that item to the United States, and 
have been allowed it, and of course, that the voucher for it must have 
been rendered ; you stand detected (I speak mildly) in an utter care- 
lessness in your assertions on the subject of these lost vouchers. 
There is an end, therefore, to any reliance on any assertion you may 
make respecting them ; when that assertion is unsupported by evi- 
dence. 

Do you think that the public will believe, that the voucher for the 
"boat Industry," among all those lost vouchers, zvas withdrawn alone 
from my office, and that, it found its way alone to Washington? But 
you will say, that the discovery of this one i!em,does not sufficiently 
prove, that the large mass of vouchers (amounting to S^6.756 45) 
which appear, as you state, to be plissing, has been charged to the 
United States. It certainly proves enough to put you to the neces- 
sity of shewing that they have not been ; and 1 believe it abundantly 
sufficient, to satisfy the public of the degree of confidence they ought 
to place in your statements. But. I htive attempted to investigate the 
subject further. 

The " proofs" as you call them, of the loss of your vouchers, are 
contained in the 11th, 12th and 13th pages of your pamphlet; and 
in the schedule marked A, annexed to it ; and they are supposed to 
be derived from a comparison of my reports to the legislature of 1813 
and 1816, and my final audit of your accounts in August last. You 
say (pages 12 and 13) that in IS 13, I reported that you had ex- 
pended, under the 2d section of the act of 12th of June, JST2, 

#550 

and under the 3d section. - :">719 So' 

Amounting fo $6270 00 



31 

And that in 1816; I report no disbursements under the 2d section; 
and under the 3d section, only Si 804 04; and you gay the balance 
#4,466 05. is a deficit to your prejudice. 

But your " sure test," and one " which incontrovertibly proves the 
fact" of the loss of your vouchers (and by me, too, as you would 
♦contend) is stated in page 13, and in your appendix A. Messrs. 
Thompson, and others, certify, that they have examined my report of 
1#13; and that by it I state, " that the whole amount of your ex- 
" penditures, under the act of 12th June, 1812, according to vouch- 
" ers returned and filed fn my office," is $1 55,374 56± — " and that 
u we have examined the statement of all the accounts of the said 
Ci comptroller against the late governor, from the commencement of 
" his administration until the 27th day of August last, the date of 
" the last account rendered ; and after extracting all the items of 
fi credit therefrom, bearing date subsequently to the said 1 2th June, 
i( 1812, and previously to the said od of April, 1813, excepting such 
<l as have been expended under appropriations other than those of 
" the said act of 12th June, 1812, we find that the same amount to 

* $99,1 18.11, making a difference between that sum and the said 
a report, of §56,756 45, by which it appears that vouchers ofex- 
i6 penditure, to that amount, have never been passed to the credit of 
{c the said Daniel D. Tompkins." 

And Mr. Leake, in his certificate (page 11) states, that you put 
your abstracts of public accounts into his hands, and by them it ap- 
pears, that certain vouchers must have been rendered to me, because 
upon these abstracts " were notes and endorsements, some in the 
" handwriting of the said comptroller, and some in that of John Elj'y 
"jr. the deputy comptroller, from which it appeared that they must 

* have been so rendered ; and in the margin of which, also, to the 
tf whole or most of the items comprised in them, were remarks in the 
M same handwriting, classifying each under the different heads of ex- 
" penditure, required by certain resolutions of the assembly in 1813.'* 
And he further states, that " after separating your private papers 
"from those of a public character," (which appear always to have 
been mixed together) he proceeded to search for the vouchers to 
which the abstracts referred, and could not find them. 

Now, sir, I have before remarked, that Mr. Leake's certificate 
proves nothing, but that these vouchers were once in my hands (in 
1813) and that he could not find them among such of your papers as 
you chose to shew him in 1815. How, again, I ask, does this prove 
their loss by me ? If they had been returned by me, and you had dis- 
posed of them in any manner, or had even lost them yourself, Mr. 
Leake's certificate would be equally true. 

If you had been disposed, sir, to promote a full and fair examina- 
tion, you would undoubtedly have desired Mr. Leake to make an ab- 
stract of the vouchers, which he says he could not find, shewing the 
items. You would also have desired Mr. Leake and his associates, 
to have made a particular abstract of the items composing their ag- 
gregate of 856,756,45. You had all the abstracts in your possession 
necessary to enable thera to do this. If you had published these with 



52 

your statements, it would have appeared how far the two abstracts 
would have compared ; and it would moreover have appeared wheth- 
er Mr. Leake did not find the charge for ihe iC boat Industry" in the 
abstracts which he examined in 18 15, and whether he did not search 
for the voucher. It is not wonderful that he could not find it. 

But in the view in which I am now examining the subject you will 
perceive that particular distracts of these li lost vouchers" Are indispen- 
sably necessary. By referring to my report of 1813, you will see 
that the expenditures under each particular head are all brought to- 
gether ; and many vouchers must therefore have been included un- 
der each head, except in a few instances, where only one or two 
items were included It is in the abstracts only, (and these are in 
your possession) that the vouchees are to be found in detail. I had 
therefore no means in my power to ascertain what particular vouch- 
ers are contained in your aggregate of §56.756. 45, and which, you 
say, are. missing. It isevident, therefore, that these particular ab- 
stracts, as also the abstracts of your accounts at Washington, are ne- 
cessary to enable me" to ascertain whether these " lost vouchers,' 7 are, 
or are not. charged by you to the United States, I have attempted to 
obtain both. 

On the 9th of November last, after receiving your letter, I wrote 
to a friend in New- York, inclosing a letter to you in the following 
terms : 

< f Sir, 

i{ Permit me to request that you will furnish me with copies of 
j* the abstracts which still remain in your possession, of the vouchers 
" ©f your expenditures under the act of June 12, 1812, rendered to 
<( this office in the winter of 1812 — 13, and which were subsequently 
" returned to you. I deem thetii necessary in the elucidation of your 
" accounts with the state. The young gentleman who will deliver 
ft you this, will make the copies, if you permit him." 

" I have the honour to be, your very ob't servant, 

"ARCH'D. M'INTYRE. 
" His Excellmcij Daniel D. Tompkins, Sfc. 

The gentleman to whom 1 enclosed this letter, was requested to 
give it to some person in New- York, who would deliver it to you and 
make the copies required. On the 19th November, i received a 
letter from my correspondent in New- York, stating that he had caus- 
ed my letter to be delivered to you, in that city ; but that you utterly 
declined complying with my request. He enclosed me a memoran- 
dum from the person who was employed to deliver the letter to you, 
stating the conversation which passed on the occasion. I here sub- 
join a copy of that memorandum. 

" On presenting the letter to Gov. Tompkins, he observed, * this 
" is from Mr. M'lntvre ' On opening and reading it he remarked 
'■< ' that it could not be done here, as his papers were all at Staten Isl- 
** and.' I replied, that I had understood the letter to contain a re- 
''• quest, to permit me to copy certain papers in his possession, and 
•J that I had intended to go down to his residence with the letter, but 
** having learned that he was in New- York, I had now called on him, 
^supposing he would appoint a time ivhen it would be convenient 
<( for him to grant the request." 



53 



« Gov T. then said, " that he must have certain questions answer- 
*< ed bv Mr. M'Intyre, before he would consent to any such thing, 
"that he had no objection to see Mr. M'Intyre fat presence of 4wo 
« Wends* on each side, and at that interview to answer any question, 
«Mr M.nXht put to'him; but that at present he .felt tnmsel f.n »o 
« discos ion to grant Mr. M. this favour, or any other, while what he 

disposition to feu y refused. That certain vouchers 

wtSit h^ placeli he hands of M,. M. he had frequently so- 
« cited of him but to this day had been kept out of them by him J 
»Ss Mr M^ntv-re had intimated a desire that M «$*«*£ 
« between them should be in writing, and thai he should answer he 
« Semr which I handed him, in that way. He hoped that my calling 
« on fc was not for the object of »-?-. f »*• a ""W £ 
.'swer which at some future day. would furnish the subject of a 
* newspaper oommmucation. Mc M'Intyre had used him very . 
« That he had charged him with intentions to crush h,m,and how could 
" he exnect anv favours from him. , 

"To 1 1 which I made no reply, except that my ^t™"*?* 
» onlv object, in seeking the interview, was to copy the papers m 
"question That not being agreeable, I had nothing more to ask, 
"and accordingly withdrew." ., *--,\ / 

I asked no >ai«r of you : I had a right to the evidence (alone 

"in vour B ossession>n which you rely to fix on me the charge of 

in jour posstssiuu; ui j -'•j .u at you w ou!d answer 

suppressing your voucher. \ou ronnsed that y ^^ 

my *^^$t^g$5*%&i ft« -^ satisfactory exa- 
suppressed the evidence, <V wt psblicly, to furnish me 

fS^a^lSS w^'ch you claim to 
or the pntMC w^v .ni inan th]g com _ 

5ES^^$?& «•> be ' who wiU ,:ot Eay ll,at 

*°tZ\?j:^oZ I'shonld have abstracts of your accounts 
at Wlshington. . have accord^ attempted to procure them J 

caused an official ^Mim » g "£* ;„ w-h rc H the required 
been received under date *«ta 24 - rf J havc 

information is promised, a f v '' ™ r " ° , w - cur lctler un- 

not thought it P™f ^ ': oaev !;\ t0 f „ tlVLy come to hand, they 
til these abstract should arrive for had they 90 J 

on^ou for the abstracts, which you" are bound by every principle of 

common honesty to fw^sh. n ,obable, that vouchers whieh 

I will here observe, tha it is «rj pr obat»l e, u 
were delivered to me in the 1 winter ol 18 to, ; t0 ^ e c wi(h , he 

S 56,756.45 have not been charg d by ^ "« ?££« ° he reportj(0) , 

g^^^^^geTS^o^ credited to you in that 
r^rtf the amount of S54,946.05-now the persons, or some of 

• ii«t rnnsidered an interview in " the pre- 
. , had before W?»n *^jmS*&SSZ£* ^ 

■Mice of Ivv.fnemls on #&<*««• (See trie com 



54 

them, to whom these advances were made, may in all probability 
have taken up those receipts, perhaps long afterwards, and account- 
ed for the money entrusted to them, by showing; its faithful expen- 
diture ; or they may have returned you the money. It would there- 
fore be quite incorrect to Iook for the whole amount at Washington* 
All that can be reasonably expected, when the copies are obtained, 
is, to find that any considerable proportion of the vouchers have 
been charged by you to the United States. 

I have thus examined, as fully as my present means will permit, 
the subject ©f the " lost vouchers. " I verily believe that a sreat 
part of them have, in one shape or another, been charged by you to 
the United States. They were for expenditures growing out cf the 
war, and could, with equal facility, be charged to either govern- 
ment. — And this may be particularly observed of the charges report- 
ed in 1813, as expended under the 2d, 3d and 8th sections of the 
act of June 12, 1812. 

That these vouchers have not been lost by me, and that there is 
good ground to believe that they are mostly at Washington, will ap- 
pear from the following considerations : 

1. You have most solemnly declared before the joint committee of 
the legislature, that you did not believe that I was in any manner 
concerned in the alleged loss, and acknowledged in strong terms, the 
correctness and integrity cf my official conduct. 

2d. Mr. Ely, the deputy comptroller, declares in his certificate, 
that he is very certain that none of your vouchers have been lost, 
suppressed, or mislaid, in my office ; and that if they had been, it 
could scarcely have happened without his knowledge. 

3. You omitted to make, any allegation or complaint of the loss of 
vouchers, long after, you now say, you knew that they were lost. 

4. You never charged me, in any manner, with the loss, until af- 
ter our negotiations for a settlement of your accounts had been 
closed, and you found yourself defeated in the acquisition of an im- 
mense fortune out of the public treasury. 

5. You know that by my report to the legislature, in IS 1(3, made 
under your eye, when governor, (an extract of which has been given 
above) I had expressly stated, that "in the spring of 1813, you had 
takeri back the accounts and vouchers" before rendered to me, and 
which, you now say, were then missing, and ascertained to be missing 
by Mr. Leake ; and yet you never pretended or suggested, that I 
was mistaken, or in any way questioned the truth of my statement. 

6. You knew, that in 181 8, 1 made another report, by which it 
appeared that a large sum, exceeding $50,000, was wholly unac* 
counted for by you, there being no vouchers for it ; and yet you 
made no complaint to me or the legislature. 

7- You have frequently made double charges in your accounts 
with the slate, proving your extreme carelessness, if nothing worse. 

8. It is already ascertained, that seventy-six vouchers (being du- 
plicates) for the same expenditures, amounting to nineteen thousand 
eight hundred and thirty-one dollars, and seventy-eight cents, have 
been charged both to the United States and to this state .: and fifty- 



53 

one of the said vouchers, amounting to seven thousand nine hundred 
and seventy dollars and forty-nine cents, have actually been passedV 
to your credit by both governments ; the whole of which appears by 
the certificate of the auditor at Washington ; extracts from which 
are annexed in the Appendix D, marked (a) and (d.) 

9. You have refused to furnish me with an abstract of the particu- 
lar youchers you claim to have been lost ; thus withholding the only 
means of fully detecting the fallacy of your statements. 

10. You requested me to return to you the vouchers which form- 
ed the basis of my report of the 2d April, 1813, shortly after th(? 
rising of the legislature. 

11. You neglected to return to me in two or three weeks, the 
vouchers you had thus withdrawn, with additional ones, according to 
your promise made in the spring of 1813. 

12. No audit of your account was made by me in the course of the 
year 1813, which could not have been omitted, had I retained your 
vouchers until 1814. And, 

13. It is clearly proved, that the voucher for the " boat Industry'* 
which you alleged to be lost, has been actually carried by you to 
Washington, and credited to you by the United States; showing 
most clearly, that you were capable of charging me with the loss or 
suppression of papers, when you knew, or ought to have known, 
that you had converted them to your own purposes. 

Now although these facts and considerations impress on my mind 
a strong conviction that I am correct in my opinion as to these " lost 
vouchers," still, notwithstanding the harsh-ness of your conduct to- 
wards rne, it would give me pleasure to find that you are capable of 
justifying yourself in this particular. If your lost vouchers, or a por- 
tion of them, have not been carried to Washington, you can show it 
by a full and careful comparison of the abstracts in your hands, 
with the items of your accounts rendered to the United States. 

If upon such an examination it shall appear that the lost voucher 
for the " boat Industry," is the only one that has been found at 
Washington, then will there be some reason to suppose that you have 
sustained injury by the loss of vouchers : not indeed by my means 3 
but in consequence of some carelessness of your own. I well remem- 
ber, soon after my report to the assembly in 1818, by which public 
attention was first called to the default in your accounts, some of 
your intimate friends began to circulate a rumour, that a part of the 
default was to be accounted for by the loss of vouchers, and among^ 
other things, it was said that a quantity of vouchers thrown into an 
old " basket," had been lost in the removal of your family from Al- 
bany to New- York. And again, that they had been kept in some 
place in your house, to which your children had access, and they had 
been thus scattered. And again, I have understood that you inti- 
mated, or alleged, at Washington, that, in 1813, I had sent your 
vouchers to the house of assembly, with my report 5 and that body 
being very hostile to you, they had there disappeared. 

It is true that these things were considered at the time, as despe- 
rate efforts to excuse or oalliate what then appeared to be an open 



56 

and plain public defalcation. But if it hereafter satisfactorily sp* 
pears, that in any way any of your vouchers have been lost, there 
will be no hesitation in passing them to your credit. 

I have now furnished my reply to 3 7 our letter. It has cost me much 
labor and some anxiety lest the length of the discussion should weary 
the public attention. I trust, however, that it will meet with a pa- 
tient perusal, and I solicit a full and close investigation of the facts 
and documents on which it materially rests. It is fortunate for the 
cause of truth, that eixery impodtaht fact and circumstance which 
&m illustrate and establish the real intention of the legislature in en- 
acting- your law; the true and reasonable construction of thai law; 
the extent of your claims on the treasury under it : and the true situ- 
ation of your accounts with the state, the great and leading points in 
this controversy, can all be ascertained now, by written and official 
documents, and by the statements of men. other than ourselves. 

I now take my leave of you. Nothing but a strong sense of my 
duty "to the public, and to my own character, could have inclined 
me to enter into this irksome discussion. I have never, as you ima- 
gine, felt hostility towards you. It is true that your recent conduct 
has destroyed my confidence in your candor and fairness ; but in my 
official conduct towards you, in all the transactions relative to your 
accounts, I frel conscious, to use the language of Col. Davis (before 
quoted by me) that my " conduct was marked throughout by a de- 
licate and scrupulous regard to the character and feelings of the vice 
president ;" and that I "cautiously avoided any thing prejudicial to 
your claims." I have never detracted, or felt a disposition to de- 
tract, from the merit of your public services." It is nothing to me, 
if after having received "enough of the thanks, of the confidence, af- 
" fection and support ofthe people, the army, the navy, and the mi- 
" litia," 3'ou should still receive enough of money. Let your patri- 
otism, after having secured to you the enjoyment of its highest and 
best rewards, wow seek admission into the public coffers. If the le- 
gislature wills it, let these coffers be. emptied for you ; and even, if it 
be necessary to replenish them by increasing the public burthens, I 
shall not complain. But until the legislature shall clearly declare 
their will, or until the high judicial tribunals ofthe state shall direct 
my course, I tell you plainly, while 1 hold my present station, the- 
doors ofthe treasury are barred against you. 
I have the honor to be 

Your very obed't serv't, 

ARCH'D. M<INTYR£, 
Daniel D. Tompkins, Esq. 

Vice President of the Utiited States. 



APPENDIX. 



A. 

Copy of a letter from the Comptroller to Ezekiel Baqon, Esquire. 

State of New- York, Comptroller's Office, 
Albany, November 12, 1819. 

SIR, 

I take the liberty of addressing you on the subject of the controversy between the 
Vice-President and myself, in relation to his claims under the act of the last session for the. 
final settlement of his accounts. Much misrepresentation has been published en this sub- 
ject, and it' becomes highly proper that the matter should be fully understood, as well as 
the conduct of the parties in the transaction. Permit me therefore to request you will 
have the goodness, so far as your recollection serves, to answer the following Queries. 

1. Did not the Committee on the Vice-President's accounts, of which you were a mem* 
ber, inquire of me, what the balance due to the slate on those accounts would be, after 
crediting him with the suspended charges for advances to agents — and did I not answer 
that it would probably be from 1 10 to 120 thousand dollars — and did not the Vice-Presi- 
dent admit the correctness of my estimate ? 

2. Did not the Committee after a consideration of the various claims and propositions 
set up and made by the V. P. single out the item of claim for premium on loans procur- 
ed by him, because that item as carried out by him, viz : $110,000 was supposed to be 
about the balance that w»u)d be due from him after he should be credited for all ad- 
vances to agents on unsettled accounts ? 

3 Did not the Committee inquire of the Vice-President whether the premium might 
not exceed ten per cent, the rate at which he stated it in his written memoranda, and did 
he not express his belief, that it could exceed it but little, if any, and that it could not at 
all events exceed 12 per cent, and that it was more probable, he would fall in debt, than 
that a balance wouid be due to him ? 

4. Was not the Committee induced to believe from the representations of the Vice-Pre- 
sident, that he had been subjected te great damage by the loss of vouchers, &z.c. and was 
not this the principal inducement to the liberal allowance of premium which the Com- 
mittee agreed to make in order to cover his supposed losses ? 

5. Did not the V r ice-President state, '.hat from some hints which had been given him 
by a friend, he had reason to believe, that some of his vouchers had been purloined from 
my office in the winter of 1813 — and did he not on that occasion add that he did not in- 
tend in any manner to implicate me or any one about my office ; but that he on the con- 
trary considered me a faithful and vigilant officer ? 

6. Was not the object of the Committee by the bill they reported, simply to exonerate 
the V. P. from the heavy balance against him on his accounts with the state ; and did 
they not assent to the clause directing the payment out of the treasury of the balance, if 
any should be due to him on the final adjustment, merely to gratify him in the phraseol- 
ogy, and to make the act in form, as well as in substance, coniormable to his wishes ? 

7. Had the Committee any idea that claims beyond the balance of the Vice-President's 
account would be made, or at all events, beyond the difference between that balance, and 
the premium calculated at 12 per cent, on one million one hundred and ten thousand 
dollars ? 

8. Did not the Vice-President make for the Committee, the draught of the bill which 
passed into a Jaw, and did the Committee, or the Assembly or Senate, alter or amend the 
same ? 

9. Did you understand that the loans on which the V. P. claimed a premium, were 
obtained on his personal responsibility, purely, or that they had been obtained on the 
pledge of treasury notes and his personal responsibility ? 

10. Was not the Vice-President well satisfied with the allowance proposed and agreed 
by the Committee to be made to him ? 

11. Did not the Vice-President state that muskets and other munitions of war, the pro- 
perty of the U. S. had by his means and upon his responsibility, got into the State Arse- 



ii APPENDIX. 

nals, where they remained, to the value of at least $400,000 ; and did he not add that by 
holding- this property, the state could compel the U. S. to allow its charge for any surhj 
that might be allowed to him by our Legislature ? 

You will greatly oblige me, by an early reply to the foregoing queries, and by stating 
any other fact within your recollection that may be useful in elucidating the matter in 
dispute. 9 ° 

I have the honor to be, with great respect, 

Sir, your very obedient servant, 

_ •_. , „ _, r ~ ARCH'D M1NTYRE 

JEzekiel Bacon, Esq. Utica. 



B. 

Copy of Mr. Bacon's reply to the preceding letter. 

Utica, Nov. 15, 1819, 

SIR, 

In reply to the several questions proposed in your letter of the 12th inst. I have to; 
state, 

1. I well recolleet that after taking some little time to make an estimate, and a* the re- 
quest of the Committee, you stated, that the probable balance which would be due from 
the Vice-President to the slate, after crediting him with the supposed charges to public 
agents, &c. would be about 120 thousand dollars, and I understood the Vice-President as 
assenting to tlie general correctness of this estimate. 

2. 1 do not know that it is either proper or practicable for me to state what were the 
motives of all the Committee for selecting that item of the Vice-President's claims, which 
consisted of a premium on loans procured by him for the United States ; though as to the 
Committee generally, I could have no doubt that the reasons were, because that item as 
computed by him, on the memorandum which wasMfore us, would amount to nearly the ba- 
lance Supposed to be dwfrom him on his general account — that such was the impression 
under which I, as one of the Committee acted, I have no hesitation in stating ; and my 
reasons for apprehending that the same considerations governed the rest of the Commit- 
tee were, in the first place, their anxiety to ascertain, as before stated, what was nearly 
the amount of that balance, and the various computations which at different times were 
made in the Committee to ascertain by way of experiment, what would be the probable 
amount of various other allowances, which at different stages of the inquiry, were the 
subject of consideration with them, the results of which were always com pared with that 
balance ^ and this item, as 1 understood, was ultimately adopted in a good measure, be* 
cause the amount of it would come much the nearest to meet the before mentioned balance. 

3. I have not any distinct recollection of the particular facts alluded to in your 3d 
query, any further than that during the course of the inquiry the rate of 12 or 12 1-2 per 
cent, and perhaps some other rates, were the subject of remark or conversation by some 
of the parties, but by whom, or in what terms I cannot say. 

4. The Committee certainly had reason to believe from the representation of the Vice- 
President, that he had suffered much by loss of vouchers ; and this constituted, as I 
understood, a material inducement to the allowance of the premium as proposed by the 
bill which they reported. 

5. I do not recolleet whether the Vice-President gave the particular reasons which 
you mention for supposing that his vouchers had disappeared from your office ; although 
he might have done it without its being now impressed upon my memory. — I understood, 
him however, as not in any degree implicating you on account of their alleged disappear- 
ance. And he never in my hearing spoke either of your general conduct in office, or in the 
transactions with him, olherivise than with respect and confidence. I remember particularly 
his mentioning, (as it struck me with something; like a feeling of obligation) your having 
at one time brought to his recollection two or three vouchers for sums amounting to some 
hundred dollars, which had been lost and had escaped his recollection, by being remind- 
ed of which he was saved their amount in the adjustment of his accounts. 

6. The first part of this query is perhaps sufficiently answered in my reply to the 2d 
one ; as to the latter part of it, I do not know that I ought to attempt to answer for any 

, more than myself as one of the Committee. And so far at least I can say, that a princi- 
pal motive that operated upon'my mind for adopting that clause of the bill directing a ba- 
lance to be paid to the Vice President, if any was found, was a regard to his feelings and 
situation, as also to the feelings and vieivs of those who were considered as his particular 
friends; a circumstance which 1 believe was well known at the time to some of them 
with whom 1 held a conversation on the subject of Mr. Oakley's proposed amendment, 
while it was under consideration in the Assembly, and which as a question of principle^ 



APPENDIX. iii 

and as carrying more distinctly into effect the real views of the Committee, I stated to 
ihem 1 felt as though we ought to adopt ; but which from reasons which it must be con- 
fessed were never very satisfactory to my own judgment, 1 was induced to unite in the 
vote for rejecting. 

7. Perhaps it would be impossible for me to attempt answering this query with any 
greater precision than has before been done, in reply to that contained under the 2d head 
of inquiry — though as to my own views I well recollect assuring some of my friends, 
soon after the passage of the bill, that 1 had no serious apprehension of any considerable 
sum being claimed under it beyond the balance of the Vice-President's general account ; 
which was the fact. 

8. The Vice-President brought in thebill to the Committee in his' own draft, and in 
(as I believe) the precise shape in which it finally passed. 

9 In relation to the subject matter of your 9lh query. I can only answer, that as 
one of the Committee, 1 never had any very distinct or definite ideas, as to the precise 
mode, in which it was represented by the Vice-President that be had effected the loans 
for the United States on which lie claimed a premium ; whether upon his personal re- 
sponsibility only, or upon a pledge of treasury notes or other public securities, or wheth- 
er partly in one mode, and partly iji the other ; although Mr. Davis, the chairman of the 
Committee, as I perceive, states his understanding of it to have been principally in the 
latter mode. That he was furnished by the general government with treasury notes in 
order either to raise or redeem those loans, or as a remuneration to him for the monies 
which he had raised for their use, I clearly understood ; but whether this was previous 
or subsequent to his having effected the Joans ; and if the former, whether the monies 
•were raised upon this pledge together with his personal responsibility, or upon the latter 
only, I had not at the time, nor have I ever been since able to call up any satisfactory re- 
collection. My general idea was that he claimed to have suffered a loss upon those notes 
•which had been charged to him atpar ; to indemnify him fur which in part at least (I say 
in party because strictly and properly it was agreed on all hands, his claim for this was up- 
on the general government) as well as for his loss of vouchers in his account with the 
state, it was agreed to allow him the premium provided for in the bill, and which for the 
reasons before stated I had supposed would be fixed at about 10 percent. I state these 
as my own individual impressions on these points, not wishing to answer for those which 
others of the Committee might have entertained on some of ihem. 

10. I understood the Vice-President as agreeing very cheerfully in the final result nn 
reported by the Gommittee, although it provided iudeed but for a small part of his pre- 
vious claims. 

11. The Vice-President did frequently state, and I think, adduced some documents 
for the purpose of shewing that muskets and munitions of war, the property of the Unit- 
ed States, to a very large amount, were then in the State Arsenals, which had been deli- 
vered to him when governor of the state by the general government ; the particular esti- 
mated amount I do not recollect, and he did urge as a consideration for making the allow- 
ances which he claimed, that the Slate would hold those arms and munitions as an indem- 
nity therefor, and as a means of compiling the United States to remunerate them for wfiat- 
ever might be thus allowed to him as a premiumfor raising monies for their benefit, and this 
idea is, as you must remark, distinctly adopted and recognized by the committee, though 
under more general terms, io their report to the Legislature ; whether upon sounchand 
tenable principles, is not now the question. In relation to these muskets and munitions 
he further proposed as another alternative, in the event of our declining to allow any of 
his claims for premium, commissions, k.c. that the state should deliver over to him those 
muskets and munitions that he might hold them as an indemnity, or for the purpose of be- 
ing better enabled to obtain the allowances which he claimed as justly due to nim from 
the general government. 

I do not know that there are anv other facts within my knowledge necessarily connect- 
ed with the subject of your inquiries, which it would be relative or material for me to no- 
tice. And be assured, sir, that nothing short of a sense of what is due to all the parties 
to this unhappy controversy, would have induced me to a disclosure, in this mode, of 
matters which the peculiar shape which that controversy has assumed, could alone, ren- 
der either pertinent or material. As it is, I am too well apprized of the very delicate and 
undesirable state, in which even an involuntary interference in any of the quesfons with 
which it is connected, is calculated to place" one, as well as the misapprehensions XV 
which it may not improbably be exposed. 

With much respect, 

1 have the honor to be, 
\otrr obedient servant, 

F£ r BACON. 
Arch'd. M'intyre, Esq. Comptroller; 



iv APPENDIX. 

c. 

Copy of Mr. Davis's Reply. 

Hosick Falls, JYov. 22, 1819. 
Archibald M'Intyre, Esq. 

Sir, 
T received your letter of date 22th instant late yesterday, requesting my answer to cer- 
tain inquiries therein made. 

Not anticipating at the time of the passage of the bill *"• for the final settlement of the 
accounts of the late governor of this state,'' that I should ever be called upon personally 
for any information in relation to the said bill, or that any unpleasant or unhappy pub- 
lic discussion was to grow out of its passage, it will not be expected that I should be as 
clear and as expltcit on this subject as perhaps might otherwise have been expected ; but 
so far as my recollection serves me, your request shall be faithfully complied with 

1 have a very distinct recollection of the committee inquiring of you what the balance 
due to the state from the Vice-President would be, on the final adjustment of his ace >unts, 
and that you answered them that it would probably nbt vary much from 120,000 dollars, 
but that the Vice-President assented to that estimate, I do not distinctly recollect; but 
?hat a large balance would be found against him, Was admitted by the Vice-President, 
and was never by him denied, to my recollection 

The report of Messrs. Colden and Bogardus having been referred to the Committee, in 
which the claims of the Vice-President, were recommended, and as the Committee were 
ignorant of what would be the amount of these claims ; at the request of the Committee, 
you presented them at the first personal interview of the Committee with the Vice-Presi- 
dent, with a document containing an abstract of the three propositions submitted by the V. 
President for the consideration of the Committee, together with your estimate of the pro- 
bable allowance claimed by the first proposition, as derived from verbal statements and 
remarks of the Vice-President, and which document is now in your possession. 

The Vice-President also furnished a statement in his own hand writing, by which he 
gives the " amount advanced by the state for all objects, $1, 075J000 

Current money by the United States, 1,253,516 37 

Current money by Daniel D. Tompkins, 1,110,000 

with his estimate of the allowances claimed as commissions for paying out the two first 
sums, and his premium for borrowing or loaning for the general government, for public 
purposes, the last sum as follows : — 

" 5 per cent, on 1st. $53,750 

» 2 1-2 on 2d. 31,338 90 

" average of 10 per cent, on 3d. 110,000 

which statement also gives the dates and amounts of the various loans which made the 
aboye aggregate of $1,1 10,000 dollars of current monies loaned as aforesaid. 

In furnishing this estimate, however, the Vice-President stated that it was not made 
from any positive data, but it was given by him as a probable estimate, and upon which 
the committee, did place much reliance in the allowance intended to be granted ; and in 
selecting the last item of the above claim, the committee were undoubtedly influenced 
from the consideration, that this item would give him a sum nearest the balance which 
they supposed would be found against him. 

You ask, li did not the committee inquire c-f the Vice President whether the premium 
might not exceed ten per cent, the rate at which he states it in his written memorandum, 
and did he not express his belief that it would not exceed it but little, if any, and that it 
could not at all events exceed 12 per cent. ?" 

That this inquiry was made, I have a distinct recollection ; and that from the answer 
given, I came to the conclusion that the premium would not exceed 12 per cent, is ac- 
cording to my present recollection, supported by a written calculation which I find among 
my papers made by myself at the time, in which I had calculated it at 12 per cent, as the 
sum beyond which from the facts before us, I thought it would not go ; and that the ave- 
rage premium would not vary much from thai per cent I think I may safely state, was 
the understanding of the committee generally ; but the language of the answer as given 
by the Vice President I do not recollect, nor do I recollect that he stated " that it was 
more probable he would fall in debt than that a balance would be due to him." 

Again you ask, " was not the committee induced to believe from the representations of 
the Vice President, that he had been subjected to great damage by the loss of vouchers, 
and was not this the principal inducement to the liberal allowance of premium which the 
committee agreed to make, in order to cover supposed losses ?" 

From the representations of the Vice President, it was most probable that he had sus- 
tained damage by the loss of vouchers, and that this circumstance had its influence ot. 
the minds of the committee in recommending the bill, I have no doubt : butthat it was 
'he principal inducement, I connot say. 



APPENDIX 

Again you ask, u did not the Vice President state from some hints which had been giv- 
«nby a friend, he had reason to believe that some of his vouchers had been purloined 
from my office in the winter of 1813 ; and did he not on thatoccasion add, that he did not 
intend in any manner to implicate me or ony one about my office, but on the contrary, 
he -considered me a faithful and vigilant officer ?" 

The Vice President complained of the loss of vouchers, but the manner which he stated 
he supposed;, or the time when, I am not from recollection able to state : but never did t 
understand him as implicating yon, or any one in your office, in any manner, in the loss ; 
but whenever he spoke of the loss, he exempted you from all imputation, and spoke of 
your cficial conduct in terms of very high commendation. 

Again you ask, " was not the object of the committee by the bill they reported, simply 
to exonerate the Vice President from the heavy balance against him on his accounts with 
the state ; and did they not assent to the clause directing the payment out of the treas- 
ury of the balance, if any should be due to him, on the final adjustment merely to gratify 
him in the phraseology, and to make the act in form, as well as in substance, conforma- 
ble to l«s wishes ?"' 

Had the committee believed that a balance would not be found against the Vice Presi- 
dent, I presume no allowance would have been recommended : and so far as I understood 
the ob|ect of the committee, it was to extinguish the indebtedness (hat would probably be 
forind against him, and that consideration undoubtedly influenced them in selecting tUr. 
belore mentioned item of his claim, that item giving him from the estimate furnished, 
about what it was calculated would be the balance found against him : that this was un- 
derstood to be the object of the bill by some of the most zealous of its friends, is certain *, 
that it was the understanding of the members who supported it, T have no doub". 

And in relation to that clause directing the payment out of the treasury of the balance, 
that might be due him, I can only say, that this clause was objected to in the committee^ 
as seeming to war with the manifest intention and object of the friends of the bill, 10 wit, 
an extinguishment of the indebtedness against him, and this being the intention, there 
was no propriety, it was urged, in making provision for the payment of a balance when 
none was intended to be given ; it was therefore better to leave it without this provision* 
us in the event of the premium exceeding the balance, a future legislature would have to 
provide for its payment, when the merits of the claim might be examined and reviewed, 
f o this objection and reasoning, it was answered, that great doubt existed whether an}' 
balance would be due him, andifthereshouldbeanybalar.ee, they did not believe the 
Vice President would insist upon it, knowing as he did, the grounds upon which the allow- 
ance was to be recommended : and although a unanimous disposition prevailed in the 
committee to make the bill in form acceptable to the Vice President, there was not the 
same disposition as to ihe substance. 

Had the committee, " you ask," any idea that claims beyond the balance of the Vice- 
President's accounts would be made, or at all events beyond the difference between the 
balance and the premium as calculated at 12 per cent, on $1,110,000. 

That the sum of $1,110 ; G00 was the sum ou which the premium was claimed, and to 
which it was intended the allowance was to apply, was the understanding of its friends, 
as I understood ; and the supposed sense of the Committee as to the extent of the premi- 
um and its amount, I hav<- already given. 

Again you ask, " did not the Vice President make for the Committee the draught of 
the bill which passed into a Law ? and did the Committee, or the Assembly or Senate, 
alter, or amend the same ?" 

Alter the Committee had come to the resolution which item of his claim to adopt, the 
Vice President, to relieve the Committee, who were solicitous to be in their seats, as the 
Session was drawing to a close, politely offered to draw the bill and submit it to the Con!=- 
inittee. 

The Vice President did procure a bill drawn, a copy of which I herewith send 3-011, and 
which was handed me b}' some member of the Committee, indorsed in pencil, " a.sxeed," 
and with the names of "Eowne, Ulshoeffer, Ross, Hart, Haring, King and Bacon," ofthe 
Committee underwritten also in pencil: this bill, at my suggestion, was modified to the 
one that is now a Law : the material alteration to which consists in confining " the dis- 
count or premium to the current monies borrowed and obtained by the said Daniel D, 
Tompkins, on his personal 7'eiyoni.ibi/ity, instead of extending the allowance of" the dis- 
count or premium to si=ch current monies" as were " procured, borrowed, and obtained 
by the said Daniel D. Tompkins," without the additional qualifying words," perscml 
responsibility.'''' 

You ask, " was not the Vice President well satisfied with the allowance proposed and 
agreed by the Committee to be made him." 

It was understood, and so staled in the Committee, that he hsd been censulted, and ex- 
pressed his satisfaction with the proposed allowance ; but after the bill had been modified 
J do not know that the Committee had any communication with the Vice President, and 
indeed, I believe the Committee had no formal meeting after the bill drawn by him : \ 
am therefore ignorant as to his satisfaction with the bill as passed. 



vi APPENDIX. 

Again you ask, " did not the Vice President state that muskets, and other munitions of 
war, the property of the United States, had by his means, and upon his responsibility, 
got into the State Arsenals, where they still remained, to the value of at least $400,000. 
and did he not add that by holding this property, the State could compel the United 
States to allow its charges for any sum that might be allowed to him by the Legisl a- 
ture ?" 

The Vice President stated that during the war, a large quantity of muskets and other 
munitions of war, had been procured by him of the General Government, and which 
were then in our State Arsenals ; but the precise value of which I do not recollect, but 
my impression is it was stated they exceeded in amount 400,000 dollars, and that these 
would be an indemnity to the State for the allowance to him : and this is the explanation 
to that part of the report of the Committee which says, " the Committee are the more in- 
clined to make this allowance, from the circumstances that this State has in its possession 
the means of indemnity from the General Government, which the late Governor has not." 

You ask, " did you not understand that the Vice President had made two descriptions 
of loans, one secured by the pledge of Treasury Notes and of his personal responsibility, 
and the other upon his personal responsibility alone, or his personal responsibility aided, 
by that of his friends ?' 

Since your letter to me I have examined carefully every paper or memorandum of Tiy 
own, in my possession, in the hope that 1 might discover some evidence to aid my meno- 
ry, and from which I should be able to answer this question with precision : but having 
failed of obtaining any satisfaction from this source, I had recourse to the report of Mess. 
Colden and Bogardus, on that part of the subject ; in which, in speaking of the mo- 
nies loaned on his personal responsibility, they say " this he did, with the assistance, in 
some instances, of a deposit of depreciated currency as a collateral security j" and from 
which it would appear there were two descriptions of loans, and that I was under a mis- 
take in my answer which is before the public, as to the extent of the loans obtained upon 
the hypothecation of Treasury notes by the Vice President ; and as the answer was made 
by me from recollection alone, and having now no recollection that a distinction as to the 
character of the loans was made a question in the Committee, and as the 1,110,000 dol- 
lars must have embraced both descriptions, it will readily be perceived how easily my 
recollection might have confounded this distinction. 

I am not able, from recollection, to give any definite answer to your last inquiry, al- 
though I think the Vice-President did exhibit a document of a loss on treasury notes, but 
what was the amount of that loss I have no recollection ; but was I to give my impres- 
sion, it would be that this exhibit only applied to a loss on one parcel. 

It may be due to myself here to state the reasons briefly that forced me to give my 
vote against the bill, notwithstanding the said bill had been modified as aforesaid, at my 
suggestion, and although I had consented to go with the Committee the length of making 
such an allowance, as would in effect extinguish the indebtedness against him, and that 
too in as unexceptionable a manner as possible j but as the bill drawn, assumed as the 
basis of the allowance, " certificates of stock or funded debt," instead of Treasury Notes, 
the securities upon which the current monies had been raised, or with which the loans 
had been redeemed, as I understood, and which went at a much lower discount than 
the former, as on inquiry I had been informed ; my fears were alarmed lest the discount 
or premium on this species of stock, at the dates of said loans, would not so far exceed the 
estimate furnished, and the views of the Committee, as to create a balance against the 
state ; and these fears were strengthened by the clause making provision for the payment 
of the balance that might be found due the Vice-President, and as it did not define with 
certainty the character of the loans upon which the premium was to be allowed, I could 
not for these reasons, and because the second clause of said bill did not confine the autho- 
rity of the Comptroller, in the credit of allowance, lor expenditures and advances, for 
public purposes to such as were authorised by law, and as the modifications you will per- 
ceive did not obviate all these objections, give my support to the bill. 

In concluding this letter, I feel myself constrained from a sense of justice to state, that 
during my whole intercourse with you, which was frequent, and familiar on the subject 
of the said accounts, your conduct was marked throughout by a delicate and scrupulous 
regard to the character and feelings of the Vice-President; and while on the one hand yoh. 
stood the faithful and vigilant guardian of the public interests, you cautiously avoided on 
the other, any thing offensive to the feelings, or prejudicial to die claims, of the Vice- 
President. 

1 am, Sir, with great respect, 
Your obedient servant, 

GEO. B. IMVIS, 



vm 



APPENDIX. 



e- 



S 



Q 3 



^ 



— . ® 



Gl 

s 

IS 
-a 



53 

CO 








a 


0) 

,a 


3 




«i 


Tj 


<s 


S 


■** 


CS 


V, 


O 


© 


CS 


J. 






rn 


?t 




S. 


« 


«> 


J3 


Ji 




o 


S 


tt 



a B 
w o 



O K 



RJ 






«9 
E- 



C 

o 



© 



a d -S 

CO c 

to 2 « 

» g •« 

a> cs ^ 

bog 

S s * • 
g w G N 

£.*!'* 

I. cc C «p 

«2* o £ 

a. >£)<*" 

S^ 3 . c3 

§22 s g 

or? a> u 

E22-S - 

cs a> 



- o 
,0 > 



c o 

.1.8 

'5 t < 

C CD 

£ & 



U 



t ° *.£ 



|1 S S 

TC CO 

•- o Ch 

fafiTf 

c >- 
— 22 

M 3 
. o 

0- > 

s- >> 

25 



U 



^ Tit- GO 

»J CO 

c i o «o 

MO j5 

o— ■ 



cs"~© 
o ?' 



o 
c 



a>^-3'C o 2 



cd 



o a 



_, ci c3 

2 o * * > - C 

-o a." 13 ^ « co c .= 

x — — X oh B w 
WHO 



S CD 

cs s 

c o 

£^ 

5 2 

t- ?, 

° a 



a 



J2 



v, CCt 



CJ 



o o 
s -a 



3 



t a n S 

w O ^ O 

-a •- ■£ >, >» 

. — C8 i- -O. 

o a b D 

cr a ~ » m 






C3 



§ S o <u > 
.o L q^ - 



1 SStS-sl* § 



ao ^ 
— ©-a 






^ ° o g a g 
oc>>.c^ 



18« 
^^ 

O D O 

°» ? co- 
rn u c- 



£ cu J3 
HI 

C 1 ^ >>■ 
a ^-° 

°'£ o 

in -^ — • 
2J »-3 

a -- o 

^ o o 
;a-*= a 

^ w a 






a s > - 
W 



o 

CO 



fcJ3 









T3 c3 



TS.Zi'a 



cw a 
£ S fcx~ a 

<u o *- c ^ 

T3 D- w ~" CO 

"" ~!-fr*3 



n cj 



i. CO 



o 



"Z 

C3^ 



^ ° '& /,, 

- g %T$ 

o ra > 5 © o 

t> j« ca * ci Z 

CS' 



' — .a 



3 >~ cs d * 

St. >"£ ^J^ 

di o O 

.c— .22 

w rt ^ a 

3i- pcy 
•O Oi > 
ft, - w c 

a 3^: - "J 
a E=fS § 

J3 CS O _. £ O 

o o--S « > 






.Si? 



.^«-o 
co.ac?« 

S ^ 2 
S ca a 



APPENDIX. 



IK 



1!3C 
CO o 



o 

«3 


00 


35 


8 







£ 









S *) 

Jo 

II 

«s o 

*" o 

° o = 

IT. — 

« — = 

»- -' • — 

So J2 

C - '- 












iJD> 3 

■gfirg 

g-.S o 

-£-e Sac 



8 



?£ 

o-a 
_ c 
53 si 

< > 

to »*» 

QQ 

© = 



4*^ w — ~ 

'so 

= > Sj 



3 -s 

fa? a. 

a- « 

— O 



bi 



> 


c 


> 


- 


- 




■7 

rti 


L. 


o 


z 




r* 


cu 




■<> 






t3 






rM 






Ol 




o 


*3 


~ 


- 


-o 




ep 




XI 


■S 


o> 


■B1 


1 


US 

c 


La 


o 
so 


a 


3 
09 














EL 




v. 


c 
IK 


■a 

—, 


§=> 




£ 
£ 


c 
B 






arS 


U 








H 





£■•=.£ 

•zr > S 

$'•£* 

<o — 

'"-' w> 3 
*" 3 C 

J § ** s 

.£ .'5 2- 

- a- o 

° k = > 

■5 s ? I® 

<«••» JH <w 

|4« 
S ?: y-'3 



c 
o 

"O 

V 

4> 
U 

c 

a) 

« 



o 






£ si 

£ c» si ^ 

o c * S 
w> — .r « 



CO •* ' 

r a; _ 



3 * iJ 



= 2 



© 

'as 



s a x o t* v 
2 ; 3 ^ — 'is § 






3t&>?£ 






S 6/ ? -t w 



'O 4> _ 
to fe O 

c '- — . 
02 



^ v -S S 4; 3! 
W B X = CO .S 

_•> « >> la 
2 h = ' " * 

u 



Hi-. 

T3 O ~ 2 ■Z 



03 






co aC 



rP K 



3 



5 
I 






" = t- *> 









7"= 

C 0J 



6*e 



•S 2 



•w'-c 



CU -3 



C 



— --2 



fee-: i - 
5 2- = 

£ *«5 ° 
IJfsl 

S! 3 SJ 

« « o K 

*■£ ="t- 






§:| 

2 2 

S3 



«te S.J5 A.S 



v at n. 

-•sa 



>-- ^.r;.-s 



F i= 






•3^3 






5 •« 2 

S S a 






CO XI 



hfl 



% •« 



APPENDIX. 






i, to to "3 

O 1* fl 1) 



5 o 
'O w 

c « 
o O 

4 OT 



5: -a 



(3 



o 2 

£ L » 
O JS 

O £ y 
frfi* 

lis 






% ® 3 I 

CO i. CI I 

> 



V «> 



£ B Si. 



„£ 



"C-CQ 




fa/3 4 "H 0) 








C3 X £~ 








"5 r,— 5> 




i. JS ri 




S ""•- tJ 




rs o"3 o 




o - c-u 




b£gf 




-C=j-Q g* 




S £ a 3 




s- £ »* 




w -. gj 




<_ S^ '- 


^~» 


°3r2 


S 


E r 1 * 


1 


i/. 


o - 1 -° -< 


ii! 


H 





iz e- ^ 

-2 e bo 



09 "a <=> ? to 

3 g *» to J. 

sill* 

R ^ 5 to co 

53 ** -8 to s 

8t» :>* 



** "3 os . to 

to S! 1* 

^ 5 a " r 

,r k T3 "a ^ 

►Si to -Js q» *» 

£ 2 * 2~s 

«. to e* -tS _ 



.s *>■ 



5 -Q « »g 
to "S £ 5 S> 

<; ** s ^5 so 

. tJ K to <3 

e "° «> ~ ^ 
•S - Si ^ ^ 
.3 2 -S ^ *• 

3 < ? S - 

.g to bo -to ^ 
»54 5 ^ "&> o 
"^i^ to B ^ 
| .^. | * « 

^, r> "S 5 r 



5J ?i^ 



K rrij Q^ >* 

.» S S (• 3 

^>^ bp,^ ^3 
"^ to •«« ~S " 
.to °» eo *» •« 



^to^I^ 

U ^ t) J !» 

09 to *? >,S' 






*) ~^ r* -C O 



hio 



^ s 



q 



to 

CI 



fc-^S 



§» 






E 
o 
H 



S 



a 

'Sk 
a. 

E 
o 
H 






^> to 






. 


^-v ./~^ 






> > u ■ > id 








>"3> 








§ »•. B 


OT S Wi 

jo a ja- 


S 8 






Jg2 J 


^~< 


to to 






Sl« 


« S ° 

d; « 0> 


a | 

05 Q 






OT © r/J 


en w cn 


«- "&• 






o ^^ o 


. O .j 


^^ 






15 -" c 




l ^ 








« | * 


O 69 






O CO o 


_o 


« to 






5i § 


< 


09 S- 










1~ ** 










^2 to 






"73 

1 o' 




g s 






03 










■ i 

OT- <*H 


OTOO 






&<' 


«2 |& 


'> c. 






6 


bC5j 0) 
T3 ^ N 




t 




■/ 


a> . = 


^ 








TT ^- '"^ 


c^ 




!>H 


I I » 


cS^S 


>* 
■< 






OT » . 
C S C3 
O C 
0) 


J2 ^ C3 
O O o 
_, s--T3 
fe « * 






o 


1 Q 


© 

Q 


i "O 










*• 7, 




i 


-e< oo 


&« 


v. 

Hi 




► <© t- 




• H * 


^3 




D 




* 9 I 


> 




a* <° 


to 


u- •_ a- 


t. 








C ? g 


z 




-H CO 


o 


ro 






»^ 


c '■:. ~ - 








>"- 


(d 









APPENDIX. 



XI 



8 


»-1 


O 
© 




CO 
03 


1-H 


• 

o 
S3 






»o 






TJ 







J« 



33 

CO 



CD 

co 



s 

CO 

o 

0) 

E 

CO 



s* II 



$■ 



CD 
CO 
GO 



a 



O- 



— o 
"3 <i 

Sco 

O v_-" 



55 



JO 



CO 



£ 

cd 

co 






4; - i j) 3 

P J fcx^ 2 

0) sS — -rs 

O vS > 

« C8-H -^S^-* S 
5 -C ^ g rt . * O.Q 

a .2 Aa p m 
= 2-2 "5 o"~ 52 

*2.£ S.fc 5 o"3 
* "Scg 2..5C5 » 

£ 52*' = a « ^c— «* 

Fp^^?o w <u 
£ ~ 2 ^t-2 
jS «- a • — £ <w s 

-3 Ctt 4> „ — * d — "o 

«£^s g-2 > 

— S .Q S *J «>*-« 

^ eo -& o .a -^ cj 
&x>S -a -? w = ~3 o 
*S oo 3-ri oj 5 CO 



ft, 

£ 

H 


12 

a. 


S 


H 


> 



► 


© 





tw 











oco 






£<x> 


a 

255 


<L . 




4> ■ 


"5> 


«<; 


4> • 


^ 




9 <u 


$ « 


V a> 


©CO 


fe CJ 



o 



© 



o 

p 



o 

ft 



a 



© 






xi 

5 



£ 



**« 

in •-* 

s « 

o », 

£.2 

el- 
o 



o 



Cm 

- O 

«2 a 
.0 



«? 



J5 O . 
O „ = 






ce — 

on -rr 



• "o a— . 
-5 o o o 

,p- 



'V .0 « 

a o^ 
S E* 

2&^S 



.2,>> 



.5 ** 

tn ^> 

» a 

C o 

« a 

o. a 

g iutt 



03 ca a-- 9> O"^ 3^ 



2 - ^" S a * "S « .« 



e 2 ? — 



o 

n 



o 



W 



o 

q 



S 



rS S 

<2^ 
&?* 

CO O 

a w 
*■« 

<». cs > 

"3 2^ ^ 



o o 





■o"3 


t 1 




a 2 






5 * 


SSg 




>^ 


S-sl 


d 

55 




for tran 
[jenies 
r subsis 




2 c 


.2 OJS 


W 5 


- 


<! 


-2 © a 






3 >,o 


CO 


~ CU CU 

- . e 


a 5 
* c " 






« 2.S 


■H 









- 




ro 


4> 


, 




s 







C^ 


Q 




& 






41 





C£ 



% 



XII 



APPENDIX. 



8 



S 



o 









<o 

1— I 

o 



e 






02 



03 



tn 


fcr. » 


S 


«.-2 


V 


J? wj 


<u 


w.s 


F 


o £ 


Gj 


J3 " 


02 


H 


© 


o 


ft 


ft 



■33 *7 ,4> 

« C t) 

Ml •"" .£ 

s 

€ |.» 

£02 . 

©la 

£&•§ 

Oj= S 

4) «-» X, 

fee's 5 

.£'?-£ 
> £.3 

cd." "O 



^i 113 C3 




P ? d- 






S# 


rr> s_ Jsi 


0> 



^•^-T 



^< 5 



§:■§ i. c«* 

ri 5 * s . 

_ .1; T 31 <^ 



.tf-ca 

g © o 

™ it £ 
> S Sa 



O 

ft 



«5 ■= '3 ^-rf 
O 4/ "O _ on 

2^5 — 

« V ? O v — ' 



> 

g 



2 

a 
p 

CJ 

£ 
m 



o 

ft 






m 



CO ~ 

CD-o 

<?»— as 

A S > 
O o 

^Z 2! 

3 2 » 

— - c« 
1*1 

*T 4> 
4* ** « 

03 Cti - 
CD£ = 
— ' ,, -Q 



5 a 



-C — 



a 

"m 

a. 

E 



£ J> => 

5 - o 



Q? n" 4t 
3 P a> 



g ><2 
02 C5 



o o 

QQ 



25 

4> a OT 

£ I cc 

2.oi~ 

-?ft' 

.^2 



£^ 

fife- 



S- 2 



2£i~ 



o 
ft 



^2 § 
-o & 

CJ O 
•O "O 

** 5 



12 & 



o g 

_ £ c c .2 
|= 3 -=-o 



*j 0) g — r 



03 S C — "g S 

W 2 £ SL« " 



ft 



CC '" — 
pi r; — ' 
(V) -C 

® c^.2 
« fe c 



■o . 

CC y 

^ - 
c» u 



Z =£ 



H 
U 

CC 

H 

m 

H 
< 

H 
02 



c t CO 
o £co 

C > 

s„- « 

s, O to 



CO 



T< O *- !«• 

3-S'aj 

.n -5 "o 

2 S C3 * 

r 2 - ® 






£ 5. 



Q- X 



cc o_-F, 

O O =3 
'= C ~ 

S 

a 



02 "S - 



■oQh 



~4> i. 

§rr ^= o,o 

— >* C 5 W C 

« £ « 5 ? » 

O ~oO CJ 

O 4) -, Zt 
O &-? 



O "O 

•V a; 

02 > 






jTr= g-fi 



a-. © 

C W CO 

cc ?;•- 



c 2 w- = 

• W w « gj > 

x S 2 o<_rJ 
O &.£jc o^* 

o 



02^ 



o 

ft 



2 £ 



o o 

Oft 



ii 

O W 

^2 

"» OS 

II 



o 



c 

ft 



<o 



OS 

o 



CO O — 
03 CO»0 



t0 tO OS 



o 



» 



O 






APPENDIX. 



Xlli 



o 



CO 

<o 



©$ >o w 



3 



5* 



«"-« en 
«c o © 



s 



3 



© 


C 




■ C 


■a 


a 






«. 


E 
o 




S 


> 




o 




H 




Ho 

> CO 


•«< 


o 




C • 


S 




K 


O o 


ed 


„J 


s* 


_ t. 


4) 


4> 


C 






s 


< 


S3 










1 


V 




4, a> 




p 


-2 
< 


c B 



s 

CO 



•n © 



■p.© 



Cv '■£> 



o o 



CIS 

E S 

.2 '*■ 



O Qt 



.9 - 

& - 

■sjs 

si 3 

2 a- 



o % a* = 

© Si 



.2 P - 

— z — > 
u.S. g 

<2"=« 
a, *> suo 

fat a> cc 

5-5* 



O oy Cd 



c 

a. 
E 
o 
H 

> 

o 

a 



^ 



-a 



S * 

c~ © 
8f| I. 

c < © 

o a> s 

V 



.2 = 



o 
IK 



£ 

cd 



Cfi 



S 

cd 

en 



13 ^ 
Co © 

w> -= © 

cd — p 
£ .. cd 



e 2,2 P 



- © cs 

•5 - — 

Od " 

r, te Cu 
aj s a 
£_•-.© 



Saw 

3- S C 
C o'> 

o 2 



-a: 
Q. 



-J" 



O 

H 
P 

® 

- » . 

4» "> to 

H c-Q 
> o-< 

ic v eg 
> n — 



e 



o 
Q 



o 

ft 



o 

p 



o o 



o 



o 

ft 



© 
A 



J=T3 




1,! JS) 


. - = 




^ ^ 




cd • CO 
>- tv >> ." fafi 


u> > 




~^ 5 ?'^0 


<U O 




t- * i. cd 


.a e 
> 




— P -a» 


5_ • 






uO 






- -r.w c o 


^ c 




•5 La ve-F a 






r ci.p o 
= §id7 o 


0J 4, 
1^ 


5^ 

00 


0i JT 

c 5 


t." 




-C a 


«; 


"rt - P • so 


^iJ 


— \ 


o 




o o 








6 




o 6 


fi 




Q A 



«5 

6 

H 

H 

CD 

P2 

< 

H 

H 



OQ 

Of .2 

d s 

o 

5 s 
c o 

•^-i a. 



© (/ 2 id 

~" "5*" p 

j. 7 *- x> 
o i*= P 

J*^"pJ^ 



4) fO 



Q.P^3 



s 

X5 



s «» 



3.« 

-a 
p 



= T3 

-> as 






*2 p «^_ 



x c - PPJ 



^^ 



s^-* S«I p 2 

5 >»i: ,2 ^ 



fa« ^ 



p v 

So 



A « 
o 

c 

V 

s 

a3 



Z ti . w 3 



5" &« a 
o 



E 
2S* 






S >* 

5 c3.S 

__ >*> w r 1 

-^ p % o-SJ 
.CS,£ bcU c & 

"> m «.P C Z ^ 
4> 4COT3«~ — qj 

=-E JS — T3 a£ 

x s $ S» « c « 



© 
A 



o o © 



© o o 

AAA 



o 
A 



.2 j 

%% 

■§■§ 

to o g 
^r ai £j 

"C . 2 

Sec 

W o> 4, 

o 



& 



<7> 


^ 


3 


CO 

o 


o 


fr- 


CD 

—< 


s 


CO 






«c 


co 


«D 


o 


S3 


CO 


o 


<D 


e< 


e© 





to 



ei 



u> co r- 



XIV 



APPENDIX. 



© 
© 



S 



^ o 
r-l i> 



18 8 



o 






6* 



5:2 



4> fl> 

<y - 



a, 

I. * 
« o> 

so <y 

v> _3 



«9 

B 

- cS 

^ — i 

.3 *C CO 
f . • 



i »o 



'> o o 



<2 a 

CO d 



^ kS® 



£§•« 



£ 
o 
H 



©« 

s 

o 
H 



6 

£*5 



M O -<"OCO p- 
° 0> ^> I § 

a S °* Q- c - 

^ a ^ * S° 

g * « «*, « 2-2^» c^ ' 



£ 









_ eo _ a S ti -. » *> «CD a 



o 

0>r?i - 

< < *7 



2j-o g |.S £* j£ 

-r( ** r% -a a a 



of 

6 



«*! 
<» 

to 



a 
«j 
o 
o> 

S 

CO 

CO 



o, 



i 



o 
H 

O . 

<— v, 
©t* 

%< 

a co 

«.©.- 



«> 



0> 



-XS 

,9 



© 

CO 



M5 

at 

««! 

02 



T3 

a. 

J-. 

03 

o 



a jo 

c CO ^a 



oo e • 

a •< w 
o a 

o ■§ 
<! 03, 



CO 

© 

z, 

< 
CO 



I. I 



3 
U 

s 

CO 



o 



o 



© 

P 



© 
Q 



s 

CO 






o 

Q 



S °n S^-o-a-2, c 



*~< 3 a-co c 
»a e — 
-< ° §4 S 



-a >> ~ 

O (3- C 

Ph <u a 

•T3 r 



<y t. > 

c co" S a 



i- 5 d 

of % « 

s > <u -a 



«n «- X 

a a <y 
05 S >, 

a S a 
ul = 

K- J= O 



a <u 

^-2- 
x a- 

v a 






a- 

M - 2 « 
£ S-? r a ■ • 2 feffl- >» 



-a >y o 

a-o 



5 "2 
o a 

•—a a 
ect ^ 

•~ S 2 ,o CO 



«a f o 



o 

Q 



.2 fcjo^- 

_s a to 

^ a a 



© o 
Q Q 



©- 

a 



© 

P- 



a 



i.« 



S 
o> 

Q, 

4) 

CO 

a 



0> .•* m« CO *^s - 



O 0> •» to **» CO - • 

- ■ = m a. • «s ; ■" 



CO 



a o 
> o 

:> 



i- *"■* . 5 >* F fl. -Cm U 

g . i « ^J3t Zi -^-s— D. c a ~ . o 



^'5 ^5 



a..S 



15 SB 



2^«r 



.s°u a --a M^ o^H-' 53 a^-^^ £-£ 5- «, S-55 C.3.WC S— a a 
(^ u..«^g a of^ 01^5 i | ^- >1 ' fci'- | |g S^ ^O w«a;S o> i*cq mW — pij <u 



S ww ^^ — 

= f©< a 

•» a >r , 0) 

, B 8 8» 
o 



0) I_ 



o 



000 
Q P Q 



o © 

p ft p 



g 



o 

Pi 



© © o 

p p p 



■«o 1— 1 so 
CO «o © 



i> urj co »-i as 

£rj if} i— 1 «-» Tf 

« ^s 1-< 

<o co © © © 



1— < If} 

© © 



co © <o 



CO © fH 

—« 25 &« 



co cn ao 



S 



CO 



CO OS © 

CO to ^ 



APPENDIX* 



'xvii 



5 CO *• 

55 < 



% 



*•» 



P 



c 

o 
c 

<! 

c 

• r—* 

o 

o 



,s 


^ 


•S? 




G£ 








*c 


-r 


s 




& 


o 


s 


£■ 


Ss 






ft 






a 




- 








ft, 


w 


•<? 


1 


o 


o 


5«l 




Cry 


wi 


Ti 












s 


£ 




«6 


3 
c 

CJ 

e 


*. 


o 


Cm 

s 




& 

^ 


o 


r? 5 


© 


3 

o 
e 8 










l-w 


5 £ « S 


+-> 




o 


~£<«v« 


a 


evera 
Oomp 
n his 
passe 


u 
+* 


Xll 




< 






"i _ » «j 




5 w *s 


<*-» 
*+-i 




O 


^ h ^s » 


^ 




o 


shov 
spen 
imea 
e lat 


<J 






^J s- *- 




H « a "ts 




W-e bog 




H -2 b-^ 




L^ S « *> 




OT 



g s « 

3 « a 
«■" • 5 ' t^. 
© -£ «• 

S s * . 
^s « ^ <u 



g s 



<o 8 a, 



S o 



CO 

OS 






s 



s 



?2 






© © o 

o © © 
>o © © 
ft CO TI< 



© 
o 



© 


© 


lf3 


iO 


-N 


-^ 




© 
1 



c 
O 



On 



a 






a^,^ 



i^^ S 5 C 

J3 ^* s- C 4J 

•TJ > r^l — " 

<u . o o > 

OJ3W w « 

••— *~ QJ ^ r-* 

icS ; j) s 
03 



0) J) 3 



'/3 





T3 


6 


n 




, "O 


H 


1 <u 


(J 




-^ , 








ci 


1 el 




o 


eq 


s 


< 






-3 




o 




'a 




C *i 




■D .-. 




PUXi 




CO cu 



b w vw 

«-' i* as <u -t; 

ao c -= a 

•r, c = ** 3 

v "* 3 ° 

V U 5 £ <D 

-c s o o =; 

■«-' q> *■* a> 3 



> 
o 



tX ■& 



(V 



•e 



ri 



CD 

«j * 

& ■ 

o 



lo S « S T3 

v " o " ° "^ 



I 

< 
«o 



js » © >» 

3£ co M 
O a>i-> . 

S o 2 S 

Z > S «J 
o 9 o ^ 

cOOo 



: T3 

: •- 'X -c 



^ 



« 



S c ^ 



w ° 

>, co d 6 
•a SQQ 



cu 



4-J*-^ 



i- o cu 



«.2 S 



g CO 



i^i r- fll r" u ''^ ^ 

a ^ s 5,2 £-n 



o 

Q 



i^ 



5S co_ 

•—^.—l fed <-* 



S 2 s 



aa, 



"5^0 

2 « ^ S 

-°_ » ^-s 

w 2 jss 

8 -^ 

^- *rs — CCS 
CUI . « 01 
S to r ^" -, 

3 a) O JS 
fa 



S & 



1< to 






ri B 


■^c> 


CCS 

C 

O CO 


T3 ° 
CO 


Iff* 


^ § 




- ■- OJ 


5 


1 


i •■" *^B 




4r) 







O 


•-' 


(3 






&. 


CCS 





rj 


T3 


OQ 


CO 

Ci3 


< 




O 



O to 

•^ E3 



. -S o 
. -"a 
-© 

© 






5 c o a> 

o ** C » 

*>-. — • ~ ^ 

«3 ?o, «- > 



.5 o 



c 



O 






ccj 



o 

O 



o 

IS O J2 g 



XV111 



APPENDIX- 









o 

W3 










o 


o 
















to 




o 




o 




09 




03 • £ -3 J; o> s» 

•£r= 2<« 2 5 



c £ 



•- 2 

!<£ ~<a 






to as 
* 2 



t sw 3 — 

*» *? 2 

et * <« = 

« eo 2t3 

•3 ^3 .^ os 

,2 ■«« c g 

E * *i 



55 sj. eg Si 

■ -a o is _- 

■>o en s 

o re fi 
tc 2 - £ 

; — ' J> •" :„ 
OX! ,J 



3 ° 2 §2 g 2.2 

~ "3 -•£ 2 * 2 « 



X! 
03 

o 



c 2-e 



« w ° 



53 >>£ 

«J2 O 



a a. « 






C 

43 



w 2 



> o 



X 

Q P 03 """ 

.vT'S a .2 

® >■< rt e 

■JS £ .2 5 

— N-4 +-> CCS 

3 - * 3 



c n'5 

03 {5 

o 5 



a c 

„' TO 

SB 

(A U 

o re 

a a 

£3 



03 «5 >> to 



J3 

* J a 

CO CU 



2 -a 

°o 

p. ' " 



» o 5 
r t>c - *- 

j o c 

O 03 03 

a.2 



w o g-S p'S o 

C J)« O Ci .-•■** 
° -5 Wo a £ o 
'•S _ "r; — « ,* s 

E S S x:^ u 

** J t— Q.J3 C G* ' 

© JS *fc S2 

•2 «s t3 o aj & i- 

o a = >? = ! 
■T » S - a 



E © 

So 






S p « a 



03 



^" re ° 



a o w 03 
re««£^ £"S-o 
.- id ® o «> g'La & > 

on c a rn rr D-x: 






--i»5fc. 02 ca 3 . « <^ *• 



-3 c 



A3 ™ CS — .u * — 

w a<^c«C,'a<i3o3 ll) 
^ - , 22- Q 

C3 



U5 

6 

iz: 

O 

-S3 

« 
H 

CO 



* S = 9 
« o 



&,V« C3 O 03 



** ^"o ° «s2'2-Q 
c^o—ooC-Eo 

oS>,rfi3ret« 

i*4tH fll j«.M ' -«Oq 



(fl-2 <u « X W -J Q 3. 



a b 



a -c 
o "52 • 

03 C3 

T3 O . 

rf C ' 

E ° 

a -c 

en •-< 

,.w a. 

:: X u» 
: 2: 03' 

• 03 

: <"x: 

• «3 "^ ■ 

o a i 

•° .♦.' 
tT © 
03 x; 
'e.fe, 

3 O, 

v< a 
S ° 

w 
o 



S «-> w>2 o 
2 ^ o ® ^ '2 2 

S Bfi-S^Ti a 

<X & u 5J 'O „; 0> 

^3 a * , 

g-C «S 2 E t« ri 

«3 gj«-2-2^ 

b •-• ^ a c *i 

F » 5 o.s i< 2 k 

b» 03 2 > o S °* 



c^^-Soa ^o> 
a fc. o 03 03 ♦» 

03 hfi e8 t 2.03_'C g-,^ 



' rt a as w -^ « a, 

: W — C fc. y ft) 03 

' © bp « «S .« -c g- 

;S^32^f=s 



03' 

c3a = <-i— i*-*o 

ax: 03'" pon: <« a 

£u* j "- ,c8 ao«o, 
j. =^£ o u« e u 
a**----- a ** 



«s o 
a '£ a 



CO 


03 u 

03 T. 


E 


E2 


M 


«J bP 




-3 2. 


2 

1-9 


'■— ■ .5 


O X 

32 





tn u 






a 


t752 


c; 




R 


2 a 


PS 

re 


il, 


Du 





A 



if 



a, 

03 

c/: 



APPENDIX, 



iis 






© 



; ? r " 3 •-ioj.^'-j 

~<i>3«3>a„,rt 



u 

«< 

s 



<s 



a 



«•> .■a 



<u o 

a a 



o 



C 




o 



a 



o 






-3 T3 



C 3 u 

fj <-> cd 

»a a a 
2. 23 



c 
o 

CO 

a 

o 



'3 ^a 
S 2 cd 
c« co > -J 

.2 g * U 
S > a >» • 

g « OS £~ 

*£: co bjoa-55 . 

^ O g -G ^ <tf 

« - .a a « 
S-|raj = a 

c; CO 



. .a 

a sfl 

£ S 
J2W 



§1 

.2 §* 

JO 

o p 



o o 

fifi 



a a c -^ ^ a <J :R 
en k _, cti -r a ^J s 

a jbi — i so 



;j — • ©* 


p 


3 


CO 






oo 


S 


3 




** l> 


in 






(0 O! 


P CD 


cu 


0) 


-? 


01 • — • 


wr5 


03 




o 
a 



g a, a« t JJ ~ y Ef .a 
>^S^2aU g.g| 

O o ~ ,. „.y « J»"J3 S CB 



B *a %* 

.>- co aj 

t< - a *2 

£j ■ — ' -a 

c . a 

a^^ 

e 




c c 

ft. fc 



^.^ 2- 

^* a,J2 
o 



a 



a-cj 



CB g 



S48 b 1 



a o 

S CO 

a ts 
.^F a 

Br 5 ? >> 

■a»o * 



o 
Q 



a! 
£> ■£3 

*o r 3 
O a 



V O 



3 



'^ is 1z «j 
a 2 5 «■ 

so ^a ra ^ 

<5 « ^r S «» 

"3 ^ a«* 
^co s-s § 

***** ^ . -w a 

_. tJ CO «« J3 

S ^ • <» a 
« * & 2 ^ 



a a o S^ © 






1-1 HM 






w. 



L0 






^ 



a 



xjc APPENDIX, 



3 



CI 



CO »£5 O O O O ifl 

GO CO TJ» 10 o O G* 




a " s "S 3 






£ 



g . co 

fa 3_ 

*-< *~ • ■ 

u a> c c '2 

c 5P 



5"« fl} 


wo x o ,o .q 

c o *o t *- 1 .3 




-Sffl 


"3 ^ «T3 






T3 ° Si 




'S o 


jSocm 




° JS 








g d *£'> 




1! 


•35 ^ > ~ _► 


L, 


> i C ctf 3 


£ 

3 




^ O C 5 - 
•> ** co a> g 

o G P o 



o i — °* 

^cq '& a 



cs c< a s-c >_ 

S-r^ ■. ti O -i 3PJ 



5" ft S "3 g rt 



CO .. fit- TT *■>" ^T* — -. 



a> iS C/i CO ,,. , ^ 
U « Q «Or4 

^■ed'"'* ^ect'^ u r o"3"5"S 

< ft, ft- &4 <J ft. Oh ft* 



O CO 
Tf CO 



kT> CO t- GO <N © CO <N CO 

pJ C P.3 an) y 

>— < f<^ 

0» CO 



APPENDIX. 



xxi 



© 





CO 




** 

o 
J5 










© 

© 






, 




o 

GO 






I— ( 
© O 








oo 
o o 


© 
33 
t- 

** 




«3 O O O »0 >0. 
iC © >o © SO © 
t~ • iO "?"• © *o CO 





z~e 


U- 1 

E i 


.23 








:' § v ^'« 














b-3 


eh& 




3.— T 




Q 










S 














— 4. 


^ T^ 




£co ? 


"5 i 


© 

IS 








^ .= "3 '5 
o.t; ^ „ 

*j"vT — 41 
E « £JD 


CO 

b 














Bis Jg s as 

Be -2 

3 J^ s.J3 




e — cs 


O 3 


H 








OS *- i 

« S S ? 

5 i H 5 

^ 2 ° 

^■" cp £ 
•* a ■£- 4) 

CC q.^ 4) 


4) 
W 

E 
















4> — 
CS 4> A 




ompkins, 'vouchers for a 
'Gen. BrCwn's brigade, i 
inent of the Governor's 


c-a 

b • — 

© " 

-S „ 

a> 

**i 

o > 

a 3 

3 a. 
> 
-a m 


"5 

S3 

E 

4) 

o 

| 

IS 

o 


-3* 

V 

15 


i 

H 
U 

ag 


0) 

Is 


3J 

cs 

*p 

E 

u 

DO 


o 

E 

> 
o 

0) 

.B 

3 -a" 
ll 












C -S ^ a 

" Cv S 

c & id ~ s 

IH^ co i a> 
>•> g 2-3 

"^ i 4) „ 4> 

B 3 . ^ •* 

2 § °"' • 

>T3 SB « 
CO "3 ,—- .B E 

X *i>^ t- a 
- s -js-5 

ft) ° — CJ 
X B^ W 
S oa •"» 5 _f 
aJ'" 1 » q.5 

% O 3 w 5 
•« E <n 3 o> 

Sff* ft 

« 5;^: 3J3 
<u 3 > ~" JB -> 

&« ^. - 




red to Governor T 
Z288, on account of 
allowed on settle 


S" J) K. O 

M S 5 2 

41 O «J 
'O ~ !_ r- 

S - S 


-a 

a* 

£ a, 

o « 


■2? 

<5 


5 

1 

V 

■tJ 

a 

a> 
c 

=3 


2 $-5 . | 

r* ^- — i- > 
u v e 3*- 


"5 ^ 
o 

|K 

s 

E 4> 

- a 

t. 4) 
-3 3 

5 w 


o 6 6 6 
"3 "T3 T3 tJ 

00*0*0 






.£©* ft> 

B . 4) 


O *■> Qi 


B 






4- i- i) E 




s~ 


■3-0 -3 


*y 




1Z ft) 


S-S2 v 




ft) - -— ;> 

6. O 5 


_£= ft) s. 




C 4) 




CU 


o> c o o 


o S 












S- 




— g «J 


> 


c s 




s 


g s cs « 


p J5 


« s 
















s_ 








(« 


1, 




e. 












Ih 








O 




O 




o 


o 




o 












O 








ft 




ft 




b 


§ 




ft 












ft 








5' 




B 4) 






— Si 
a) a 












-IS 




ft) 
O 

a 

3 












0"0 
« 3 




3 


8&b 














*3 

-O 








"2*** 




e2'n 






o -n « 

*"5 4) .2 












« 










c-c 

o « 

•*= £ 

"o 33 




CO w. 

*- "-H 
CO -SJ 

Sai 
ft . 

s 

<*C5 

o'o 
to 

flj ft) 




o 

B 

u. 

B 

o 
o 


«e e S 
o cs B 

z: 2 „ ejoi 
- -a * j:>o 

o c a ~ 

J ,, O u z 




c 

C6 
►J 

_© 

0) 


c* d 0' 


o> 

•3 

E 
Oj 
O. 
s_ 
CS 
U 

E 


.2 3 








2 s 
a> 

"5 




2" 

S a 

3 V 




S 
1 


eg t> S 

Q. S !- wv u 
X M O E a! 

4i*5 c o a 




E 
3 

> 










"2 

'5 


£ 

6 


§.2 
g-B 

>•• B 
«•- 

1. 








a_ 




*J* 




0. 


OS 




«*< 








EX. 










eo 




2 




iO 


o© 




©» 




s*<no> 




2 








*■* 










t— i i 




i-^ ■■■« 


"" 


—1 






"*: 








"i 




© 




SQ 


O iT3 




CC C3i 


^_ 


—J 


















<M 






-"s^ 




^^ 


J^ 




*— 1 


1> 












>> 




<i 




D- 






i^> 


4. 


u 




c* 












3 




cu 




4) 






3 




ce 


£J 


cd 












•-3 




ft* 
03 




en 


1° 




§i-s 


^O? 












CO* 








o 


% 








rf 
















•-4 








^^ 










— « 
















CO 








CO 










CO 















X\H 



4PPENDIX. 



Ml <Z 

s, x> 2 

o <D c 

S-Tr; « 

« ^ ,_, jj. 

<» c; "o 5 

cc ■— rs — 

£ E S » 



0) 



W. 



4. « rU 



_ 



c? o «o ia 
loos'- ef 

G0<£r -* r-t 



8 8 



'H 2. 



.r. 






£ £ © o 

b«2 > 



§"8 

c £ 



oj o 

-O. - 

§1 



p ^ 



o „ 



H 
O 

< 

H 
to 

M 



. c <u ^ 



3 * 5 






S/^-s.^ 



fcB 



'&Pl > «- « 



o o 



9P -" ~ 

a> © - 
b > b 



e 3 



a S 

E a s ^ 



3 i £-a «§ = = 

j . P — 
., i< k » « -rt P 

2 P "2 2 •- * « 

> .£ tC — « — ^ 

-n _2 O o ~ o> a> c B __-.;= ,■ 






O « O 2 — h 



? ' Sf fa 

a/ t- oj 



.5 - '3 « 



or 

a 
v 

«3 



sr 



-»i r'Cja aO~ a>C-o!rfa 




APPENDIX. sxiii 



8 



;-c si -s X Si.'Si lr" , '5v'.. .: Ai."?i? 



-— f « < «■ 






4) C S 






■ *■! 3 ° 3-^6=2 S I ill St"« * a? 



'-5 Nih^ 







XXVI 



APPENDIX 






00 

o 






CD 

O 



GO 






g 

GO 



3$ 



CO 

o 



o <u 

3 W 
•73 3 
© 1> 

> 
CO 4) 
JO * 
CO nj 

o -3 



CO — 

— 3 



*fi s 



OS 

H 
en 

«5 



OJ -i. - *** i. "O ~ ■ 

■5 rt ^ o £ c « 
>> § ^ o.«i s -b 

-O 0> Q) to « -T 2 

-j: i ts s o 3 
* 2 § ^ i- c"o 

E> rs — ■" P w 
x se c OT g -a 
£>-3-£ ev— ** <£ 

o-2 2 =co 2 2 

S'lSSH 5 4» 

« oj •= is w 3 - 
g coJS - a,— .a 

« c 5 2 "O «, 

O <» w 1-° = .O 
CiOO ~_ 2 
5.5 C '-ZZ ^ °- w 

5 ? i. "i » ?. 

'«.r o ^ m a. = 
-C-_ r 2 » 2j= ^ 

2 - « ~ ~ o o. 

*^* ~ X co O. 

O rs.O O CO j; 

cu s- "r: -c — 

- -a - c •- 



-0 



co 



E « 
>> a; 
cd c 

O w 

„ CO 



CO C > r- -i, -3 

- £ « 2 es 5 

> tj c b x _ 

i P P f = — 

o ~ O x » 5 

9 oi e 



— co 73 

o-=-2 



H co "■— 
S. o co 



o 



.s *. 

'3 ~ 

JO co 



CO 



CO 3 



2 >>? = 

P. ^^ a. 

tV -y; w Z* if) Q> 

3 > »*g cd-- js 
to "S £ &J0 jr •- — 

5 t Z - 
-6° 



:-a s J s-.s 



o «y* 

a « ?* 2 
K b ^ p 

_,' o c ™ 
O 4> 

?§ = = 



a, _^ 



ip^ 



C > 
<u .-3 



o *) 
C .E 

41 O 



a « 



2 o 



=^0 



C5 5£ 



o 

-C — w -r VJ 



T3J= 



= B' 



P 

08 *s- 3 ^ 



fe * = - £ 

" O IBS-' 
0= > O (C i 



-2§S 



x — - 53 — 



.c .2 -C 



-5w'-3 



^^ %jz „c 

o q.3 2: r 2'3-H--?"-S < 
>* S- 12^"~ s s;^ 2 c 



fa 



a, qj 



• o 

2*o o 

sis 



--c^ st e-<a 



-T a> 
5 SS'O 



£ 2 









;so 



Z! r-5 ^PT"33tor;ro — 

'-§ £ SH 



2 wi 



i* w > hJ »2 2 "• ~—~ oj 






"-" w ^>- 

£§^ 

3 o 3 



ta 



o 

Ebb 



CQ &0» 



w> 


— 


O 


cs j: 


O 


£ 






O 




O 




WJ 








H 


B 


i- 


, ; 


O 


& 




q 


> 


T3 

C 


,,: 


O 


<a 


a 

03 


O. 


§ 


v-3 


(S 


CS 





w" 


1! CO* 


L ■ 




O CO 


C13 


c_ 




a. 


wi r^ 


£ 


B 


CO 


<i> 


os co 


^ca 


bSQ: 


Dm 






o\ 






9i 







c =^; 

o co 

^ CO ^, 

»- u e 
CD 03 § 

' rt JJ O 

£ x « 

^ C in 
") O "ij . 

«v c — 
•" (~\ 



=a 



— o ■< 

c *> > 

(B ° C 

a. < 



- 9J C K s 



co C 

C 



w S-- •- 



03 — > 

|| 
> »^ 

(C) rjt. 

03 



3 03 
-O O- 






<r >i x 
"O • CQ 

•p£C 
g-p=2 

cj -p 

^2^ 3 

^-* • — Urn CJ 

o S j; o 5 

O— — 3 co 

^:^« 

03 D." ce > 



CO) 2 



8 § 



r~ >o 



3 i» 



2X 

co't^r 

r— 1 — « 
OO CO 



APPENDIX. 



XXV 



J2 


.-2 

"en 

CO 

O 


CU 


rt 


bfi 

c 


CO 
co 

a 




,3" 


U. 




-B 










o 


*j 




>> 

cu 


"jp 




■Jl 


Li 






X! 


c 




a 


£ 


^ 


cu 


CO 


n> 



o <a 



w o si 

i s 5 



o G a 



^C s - r* r-> 



W 



S2 






«J2 m 



o-p 



h It C 

d £ & 

G ' 



-B Xi 



<° A ~ m T3 *a 

><* i< s * 

® .2 © 03 .t; 

till" 

SO CU 
O s* CU 

-« ^^ 



.B CO 



m o g e „• e 

E ^^ 



S-o 



•—■*■*-' T-J i i r- 1) O ^ 3) 
r-»'--« jvw ej jj sh J* « ._ «* 

S £ » £° g>g §*£";" -° 



.S«j, 



3 *- 



o oM 5^.2 



•■tJ,2 o 2- 
2 o-^ti 2 » « « p » 



-I. 



s 






CO CO 



cu x: z o 



is JO- 
*s ™ J= ^ § •- » -g 

>o ™ o <a o cu o*c 

« S * «w g's'S 

•**•-! h.« n en JJ 



m »>"» rj O ^ ^ 






cu "^ CO 
en co _c ijj )-< 

£ * 

o 



_r iy ,_ ojj'Q z, q k- g.,-^ ^V3'-:c^, ^ cu->~ s OJ/tn >- t-i 

g^l g &^ I* 3 «-§ g 2 M ^ 2^ % ^ 3 sl^ 5 
- w fc £ E c £ § §■ « g § '2- o « o = «S ° « *& w - 



a> to 

£ " 



rt -^g"c7 



O c 
S3 CS 



s 



a* 

b T3 3 ■.« ♦« ■•« «3 co o *" .. 

- g s s rg«T 

Z 3 3 S 5 2 



S£!2 



' <c^ 5t2«23 Cug 

-.£ o « © = «» ° co^" • 
® * 1 e 11 =** ZgO 

r~» I-* •i"^ w i" 1 * ro rr« — - ^*™ 

r oo^-^fcfl a jj n S3 

C CD . —'Sfl-it).— COco 

cyj2<2 tf.5,2 pl,£ tvi* 



-a ^ . 

O s-'S 
g o <u 

CO -^ "IT 1 

co O 9J 
03 > 

& ^t3 

tic 

S co O 

; tj o> 

co CU £ 
J3 Oj cu - 
0) ^ <» (» 

£ « o 

^ -B ,2 3 

""8 fig 

_ B >■> | 
- 03 ctf 

rQ > P,^3 

03 03 = Xi 

"^ rt g a 

co rs co 
<LD 03 ^=3 



ctf 



cu co 









e- 1 ^ 



0>S O 



I CU 



3 <" i s 

o x: >> o 
2S^ £ 

». B B o 
B XS O 

C - S .2- 



S^S23 



.5 

S s* 

J? 03 

0} S" 

Q 



03 

•£.3cS 

r— J3 — 



9 

£ 
a 

"-a 

o 









OS 



xxvi 



APPENDIX. 



i 

600 
2000 


© © 

CO G* 


CO *- 
r- CO 

io co « © 
oi co so © 




i— i 
CO 

CO 




-The reasons which prevent the 2000 dls. 
of this abstract from being passed to the 
. do not exist with respect to fhe present 


PC 

& 

"Si 

<0 

B3 
I 

I 

« 

"5 


-Now allowed. 

cause the amount was supposed to be al- 
57 oi this abstract. The Governor says, 
i0 will be accounted for in the account not 
' He probably alludes to the account in 
abstract, on examining which, it appears 
ures charged therein, were partly for the 
and partly for other expenses. The ex- 
one arsenal, as charged and allowed in 
stract 9, amount to D6004 88 ; and it ap- 
ceipts therewith, that 1) 394? was paid to 
r for building the arsenal by the Gov, 1 1 
ucher46, (J Watson's account) that he 
sum of D 1000, making in all nearly the 
upended on the arsenal It is therefore 
the D 1250 in the voucher now under con- 
t nearly all credited in the arsenal ex- 
vever transferred from the rejected to the 
n, for further explanation. 
-Now allowed, 
do. 


o 6 6 6 

6 6 6 6 

H5 'w-cx; 






« 6? 

« •- '■ 

C- - •_ 

oi^ c 
5 O C 
tB 5 E 

5- C 

s- 
O 
fa 


Formerly suspended- 
Former] y rejected, be 
lowed in voucher 
14 Watson's !>■ 12. 
"yet examined.' 
voucher 46 of this 
that the expendil 
Malone arsenal 
pense of the Mai 
voucher 57 of ab 
pears from there 
the commissione 
appears from vc 
paid the furtlier 
whole amount e 
doubtful whether 
sideration, be nc 
penses It is hoi 
suspended colum 
Formerly suspended- 
do. 




^ o 

tn O 

<U '-5 

•C O 

% > 




Advance to James Watson. 

Advance to James Watson, on ac 
cdlmt of the ar&enal at Malone, 
and transportation of military 
stores. 


ft 

c 

(/■J 
*-> 

«J . 

£•§ 

<u 

s 

a 
>-» 
o 

a> 
u 

c 

> ° 
•■o ^ 
< 


Paid James Watson's draft in fa- 

'-ur Of Russell Atwater. 
Paid Simeoni'iisbie, for Elizabeth- 
town arsenal. 
Eri Lusher, for transportation. 
Advance to John M'Lean. 










to '■& 


t~- co ** in cr <N 

*> t>- CC CO O: C 






d 

'-5 




CO Q 

cm o* 

m 

at 


Oct. 20 

July 13 

816, Nov. 16 

811, May 31 
816, Ap. 15 







APPENDIX. 



XXVJl 



«5 


CO 


Ci 




!>. 


o 


CO 




CO 


«0 


gfi 








s^ 





o 
o 
o 



o 
© 
© 



o 




jz; 


"O 


H 


: i5 


u 


: o 


«< 


■15 


K 


H 


is 


CO 


<; 






•n 




V 




T3 




C 



o 



o cd .3 *~ . 

— to o CD 



co 5 



•S 2 



o , 






^, cci cc? cd 
d ■£ p 3v 

5 t« S « 
O 2 2 s-. 
,. 3 o CD 

- c f3'*f 

» rt 3 J5 
E? • ra ~~- 

S = «£ 
|p** 

*■« 33> Q cd 
cu o 5 co 

><£ — 3 

O 1-4 CU 

.5 -*£ 



.a 



T) 



co Jv a 
ks o a 
^ "♦»••» 

-, CSTD 

& a 

O ^3 S 3 "S, 
to 3 O ° * 
3 CO .3 35 <» 

£ o 2-2-3 

£ 3 ri -3 
O cu "i CO 

■O > « •- nj-T 

CO O -p CD cu 

ca o £ o _2 
>6 b'Efta 



ills 

O . i CO 
_cd g j> _ 
'q?**- cd "3 

^ coZ; I 
^S c 



o 
E 



^ C3 



'•5 C _ 

w g »1 3 

* 5 '5 2 ^ 

3 <+- CD * h 

£ C -"3 cj 

£ CD -, <3 .2 

^" cj ~* ix cu 

cd a *-* -a *• 

r- £ CO _l 

C-,^3 a 

>.2 » 5 

CJ *,.„ £ 



cd • r s- a p 

« O 1-1 o ° 

«3 C5 2 ^ « 

12-s.S s « 

CO r. CD cj 

•c ■ .2 "S - 
■*-' • It ™ -J? 

u D > -y) 25 
S-> CD CO > 

faC % ~5 ^ CJ 

2 +-> E =0 co 
CB — p k u. 

** CO ? JO T3 
O 3 cS ^ B 

flfii 

cd ,o 



2 § 

U4 c 






hD > 

■°. o <? - 

"C '^2 W /. O 

3 a • p "" 

£-. ° 5? ; 1L Ct3 

c 



6 g^a >.^ a 
5 § « c'n *• 
- affl 3 « a 

•3 = r 5 S « 5 

CCv _d P .—, 'v s-i 
I— ( O — ' 3 .CD 

>iu.o a '■» 3 
a ■-> -** .3 a co 

C3 5 *? -3 ?, £ T3 
C 3 '- ^ CO *; 

y ~ b s ° ■" = •? 

S '-P ^ 5 CD <-> = '- 
.3 w — i 3 O 5 3"0 

-S |^Svg^« 2 

> 5 .22 ^ -r cp -c .P 

r< *^ "5 _ o --; o 

i^cu— id o- c 5 

"-^= : '2 = rf ^-r! 
£"S » S ° * a 

^ rf SP"2 ! -B 



P 3 ^ r^.-3 - •■*"> in 

:i^l^3 c i^2 2 

3 « >.T] ^j rt— p 4- 
i *3(rt^*- , CD ra .3 



-O CO 5 CJ 



-I ^ .— 1 
Hi 33 

I 3 cfi 



^ . ^ ^ 'J 4i J> H 



o 2 c 



-3 g5 

H p *3 «H rt 



o 



-. CJ >, 

CO <» -£ 
-3 1? CD 

cj t, a 
o 



a o 

5^5 



3 5 
0»"3! 



3 4-> 

o cj 

8 « 

CO CD) 
3^ 

CD 3 3 
•§73° 



c« 



CD 3? 

& p 

«n c 

3>" 
j^ * o 

£*£ s 

£ c cj 
o 













.— , 


' 






o 




25 






W 








1 




si?' 
o 






o 




o © 

© © 


© 
© 


a 




o -4 










© © 


^ 


o 




-3 O 






*5 CO 


co 


. © ^ 


3 


CO 
CO 

*s 
s 




cj U 

s ° 

> CD 
^3 « 


to 


CD 

fcX) 
CO 


CD 

3 

CJ 


CD ^ 

•p '-0 o» 


1-1 


O 
CJ 


CO 

3 
C 


o 


o 


p JS5 

- i 


c2 
o 


!^ > > 
.-,00 

© r ~ | 




CD 

.3 






O 


CT 




"cd 


o 


-3 >»0 

CD *^ 
3 3® 


co CO CO 
O rirl 




o 

a 

co 
> 

■■a 


•— 
° 


"3 CD 


CO 

a 

CD 


CD 


ay met 
VVliit 
dvanc 


=3 

« 

CD 


O 

3 

> 




< 




pu 






a, -*! 


tf 


< 




to 




c?* 




CD 
SO 


© ^H 


»i5 


' 








SXV1U 



APPENDIX. 



f^ r-l C5 TF 
Mb l> 1-4 

OONQBOO 
3Q CO *i r-l 



CD 

^ 3 

O 



r-t <M 






CD 

CO 






O 
O 



a 

50 



si 

"o 
e 



.3 

o 



3 
si 
t> 
-3 
< 



§5-3 



:-. co en . 

• — "* .is o> 
^ O eo r/-> 

r- "S 3*= 
3 C " 



CC X! 



> *- 

o a 

U 5 



"3< 



_- V CO js g 
£.£rH 4- g 

3 *-• . •_ O 



bJD. 



o en t^o^-^ 

W'Ja © ^ °° -e 

• — *^ T3 jS 8> .ti 

Si fO S; 



(U tt> 



C3 
S © 



S5-3 



*S r! 3 



3 .5 



2>>g . E © 
«"=■ 8<» g- 



s5 

o 



i <~ 



O <P 



T3 



03 Si -G D 

" i: ~ o 

RS "3 aj 



C — -5 



I (?) 



2 O) & co ;-. js 

s _q © i* _. +■* 



OJ 



.2 "^ -3 * S « 

en cS ^ja «3 ft 
"S-S © © 2 

S s-< t3 > *3 to 
2 3 cu „ g"- 

a o © *•■ ■- 

^ 3-O iX! T3 *» 
~ 3 > . © 5 
O ~> 3 3 £ ^ 
■»"- ' -3.3 O *T 
en ~ _ _C J3 © 

S£So M S 
S c rt a c S 

> .2 en £ 3 d 

cb.2 g S g 13 

© £ -2 3^ 

3 3 q iO > en 
"J © _g O OT 3 

3<Z! r- ©"S 

■^ © "o S^-> 
«° - -in W O 



i<35 .- 
CO si 



o 
o 
3 
«5 

^ 3 ™ »i 

3 o S c e* 
»^ ©«2 

to a 
© - si i« >> 

3 >>£ S !- © 

§« #a f .2^ 

r C .S >, g bfl 
03 °-3 S 3 b 
o (» 2 © u xi 
3 -v. .S X © ° 

iS > 3 . Si -i-» 



.. o 




O -3 -3 3 5 O 
»>" ©3-3*13 

--« ^.g §1 

2S £B-^ 

"© rt o g © © 

a 2 c ° 2 x: 
o 



n « « u 

P-£ ~sj 

o 



tS •«! 



* 


r-t 


©• 




M 


I-H 


cp £ 


X3 
O 


1-H 
bJC 


rC 


o 


3 


■fii « 


Q 


< 


SIS 


oo" 
o 


• 




CO 


0» 



APPENDIX. 



xxix 





o 






© 






CO 






o 




o 
o 










CO 



©* £ 
94 







OS 


o 


CO 




«# 


o 


t- 






1-M 


CO 


s 



3« 

to T3 

1c <" 

s 



3 



3 4> i-l 



oja 



b£ 



I* 1 

"^ to 

fc, *» 0) to 

o'- o as 

c „ 4> m 

£.a c S 

2.5 c: s 

"" , g « 
• o S * 

S-5H § 

O- C~ 



a 
GO 



3 
02 



3 

a 



■3 

a 

CO 



V 

O T3 

« 

1 fc 

> 3 

° a 
a .S 

.5 = 

.C Ml 

4) 

<»~ 

*- -j 

ilg 

H» 

to 

. 3 

*« a. 

9 

'S? 



a> 

-3 

3 
O 

> 

o 

c 

M) 

.5 
*S 
.n 

o 

S- 

4» 

-3 

H 



13 
4> 

o 



61) 
Cm 

3 

t3 
<u 
.a 

(O 

3 
CD 

s . 

£3 CO 

CO _^ 

.S3 

il 



3 

a> 
&J0 



o 

a] 

60 

6 



13 CO* 

3 . 
T3 -C 3 

-o 

3 

CL. 



v o 

-a > 

3 r- 

QJ ~ 



05 



ua 

3 

CO 



3 

CO 



>> > 

4> . *- 

Q. ."- '« 
O 4> 3 

t~ 4J M 

3 3 

feJCg 3 

3 > W 

'53 o « 

■° E s 

„_, M>3 
O CCO 
£i a> 

-O — 
• 0) « 

w S 3 
y — OJ 
V p. 

"e? 3 
CO 



2 £ « « 

*> "■* to GO 

IPS 5 » 

3 ^'13 j_. 

"is g s* 

03 « cat- 3 
t> j- a °- a 
?s ,5 3 tf w 



— « <U a, 5X)-*» 

»~ l '~ 3 3 r- 

. S M O.S 

S^ to !l_ 

&**••§ 

O — <» !£-2 
>-5 hC-cS o 
"^ .3 i- &. ^ 

C 3 cd •— 
"a *o -3 b/^o "o 

O O 



o 



act 






^5 ^J 

3 3 
O O 



t* & 



3 


0} 


3 


g 




^ 


6fl 


CO 


a 




> 


> 


Rj 


CCS 




a 


, 




•a 


"tt*s 


<D 


« 5> 


O 


o & 


« 


.a> © 



C£ 



—5 —3 <M 






o • 



2 a 

,3 <U 

a t3 

»- .3 



« 2 

h 
P — 

B B, 
•S c 

o i_ 
•S Ml 



to w< 

a u 



-o.i a a 

c _ — » 

*St? 3 

C-.e co 

. « 2 eJ 

— >5-s 






3 « 

<u - 

'5 <u 
a o 

• — «n 

«a 

»•> o 



C3 



CO. 

O * «9 (J 

_ t; 3 — 



* fafl 

O 3 
fe M) 
5 M) 

r, CS 



*5 to 



.H t2' 



Cir a 



3 Q- o> 
•» <P 5 



a- 



cu to cu a 05 a co 3j 

- 5 rji • - g 

a et> -a 2 "J i. 

= "3 f to S.O 

w -5 >> „mj- 

£ o«-< 3 
. H Oh 



3 M 

T3 O 



-a ** 

3 t2 



u is a) 
ag § 

PflSj 



_ 3 O 

^CQ a 
S-a,2 



T3 3 


3 


a 




to 


3 


3 


3 « 





c 2 
«_ 

""■ 3 



3 <o 



s s 

<t> o 



a o H-l^ fcjDo) <v to 



to hn 

c ^T 
4) O 

■X J? 

cp a 
. o 

J> a*S 

'*• 4)-- 

> a 



o 









41 

™ - 3 - 
ft 



*- a 
s a 

-a ° v 

"O a s 
•500 



a 

3 >4 

S 9 . 

S to cd 

13 373^ 
3^3 W 

CM &■ 



^ S 

a* 

4> *> >C 



Qj to r-* 

."HrH a 
*S 'Je '-~ 



«o 



«-* t?) co -fno 



. 


10 


e^ 


O 


CO 


c< 


T-< 


!^t 


«2 

a. 


CO 







c 

3 


©< 






•<? 


^^ 






— < 








CO , 





»o 


CO 


r ■ 


CM 


rs 


ba 


XI 


b 


< 


<» 


*«; 


i-H 


t- 




CO 


99 




•~ t 


*•»> 





3 XX 



APPENDIX. 



*« 8 

22 <u 






R.«8 



'-« 



*§fc> 



r* 



CO § 

Co <u 









NH CO 



<V Co 

j.8 

8 ^ 

n ~ 

H 

03 

a 
3 



>3 



Co 






s- 

13 

s 



o 

en 

H 

9 



©I 
t- 

CO 






CO 




"5 «* bs-o 5?-- 

-* ;i: i; £ ^ ~ ' £ Qi 






<u 


.n 




c 






a 


o 




5 


2 


u 


ca 



-a 
a 

C3 



en 
a. 



s 


be) 

31 




JO 


o 






C3 



>• 3 



a. 



^ a v 



£ -a 



S_CO 
1- CO 






CO SM 

OS 



•f-5 

=3 a* 



C CJQ 

Ctf O . 

~"o a 



K C^-- 



o ■**! 
-co 

B c 
= o 

oj — 

a. 



C -J -T 

o to'5 
O • a 

Us 



p 
d 

a 
o . 

•-5 CO 

P^5 



§^3 



a, 



.5^ 



c'bc? 

o «f^ 

sir 

sr ° 
*§: ** 
•^ >~. 

— a> 



— CtJ 



o o 

4) OT 



— o 
a; a.,. 



-a 



— 
« 

s 

M* 

g 
3 

H 



o— 2 a 
£ rt'E a 



a a ^ 

rt ^ co . 

— - GO 3 CO 
— M .— 1 



o .0 2 o c 

a = >ie S 

a-o — ^ •_ 

£ br.^ E B 
ex c 



ci 


■a. 


a 


T3 




CO 










g 


2: 


•3 


i 




> 






f 


( 

< 




r^ 


,*. 


■v.1 


cj 


• 








-P ' 


1 


^ 






& 


EC 


CO 


tsi 


C9 


«o < 



APPENDIX. 



XXXf 



o o«o 



o 



COiO 



&* o 

C5 o 

co o 



CO— t 



O O 



S'f* 


3^ 


'""CO 


co 


. SO 


G* 


>«*& . 


r 


**> 




». C 




5 JrCO. 


cu 
cu 


P-t ° 


to 


-.c-3 


* 


02 ' 


jj 


. = _B 






e? 




1*5 




^ 


c .c cuO 




s- cd *- 




■g aj. 


.0 


cu Q „"> rf 


C; 






•S >-, c. to 




$■ ■ Z? ? -O 


5y 

B 


° B ^ "3 

d) £ C a 

— CU ~ * - ' 


10 


£-0 c 
■- «j c 2 




,C 


-a •- a, 


CO 


If &£ 

lgce« 


ro 




Ss 




cu 


<~ 5 

^•£55 


j 



CO' 



*5 cu ^j 






00 



B >y 


3 
C3 


C CU 

E "5 






0, B 


to 2. 


(O 

a 


<t a 


"g 


^ 


— &X) 


Jr O 


C- 


£ '«> 


c ^ 





CU 

£~t 


&« 


> 


£go 


-H 



O 





> 

d 
s 



B 



cfi 



to 



c .i h Q 



o 



b "T a 
oj >> -< - 
C-G « 

C to ti 

CO 4; !_ .- 

— ~ ^"cL 



15 cd .15 
c & -q. a. 



O 



o « 

£~ 

c -a 



to o 

1— <* 

§.*! 
o rr 

3? 



c^* 



©CO 

.5 fcc ® 

'S .E ■ 



fcc <u c © 



— •— a» 



o 






^-3 = Si a 
B C ' _. J ^ ^ 

->*>~>-*s = £g 

"^ . ^ r-. < g5 —* , CS 4> 

05 a" i— ^ a; — r^ _s 



CO CO 



a 

£3 



*2 v - CU 

a> Cv 









- 5 -o * S? 



~'.5 «J 



CU o 4( 

O o =• o 

CS SJ 









* . : . 'Z b '"• .r®C^t- "5 

5i -3 < -o 7 "O c£ *C "S c^ Co 

S <to>Ss:wk-i>So~ 

P S ^ § J=> o o o o o ^ • « 

L. '<*" i^ ^^ — ,_, _^« r»» !_ _. 1 



c 



s s= 



o&» c c 

-3CO T3"# 

o - cu . 

« :- > o 



CJ 



cu 



w. 



Q 



c c 



Q Q CQ 



& '" 5 

a ^ oj 

to t» 

£ 5 



^3 



S 






« c 



CO *s 



o 

55 

H 
H 

CO 

H 







M 



as 









f»-«S'« 

ti« . en 

oO"o 
£ £rs 

°Q- 
^ . o 

ted 22 

S cu cu 
£oS 
co^ 'So 

"33 

c 

B 



•73 



03 



CU 

pq 



o 



-5 
c 






1 go 

— r- t« 

25 - « 

rt -5! CU 






og i. 



_-0 
5 1-4 

, SB O 



o 



T3 



u 



cu>-3tSr> S: w «u 
^^^ . £c2 ri 



CO 



£ 

od 

Dm 



~ '/. .2 "^ -i (3 

Os = HiJ -co 

S? = S-=£.5g 

B CO B CO 



B 
CO 

cu"" 

i £ 
^5 ^ 



T3 rO 

C ~\ 

B tl 

c2 ,• 

B ^ 
CU to 

c B 
o <v&i 

to Ji 1-H 
C Oy CX3 

H. cu 
S cu 

• J s > 

« g o J 

I I «o 






a 00 



£ S 



S3 

J2 



= •'•» 



CO 

P3 



M 



o 



B C 

eu - cu 

£.= £ 

B B 

a, a 



<**- 



o 1— 

too 



IQ G^ 
t~ CO 



ifj C5 



o o 



CO eft 



xs&it 



APPENDIX. 







■©* 



*-~ O ^^ ^n r* 

* Je .22 = ^ t~ - « 
-fc, *-c bf*. °^ 



S O 



Co q 



c/> 



.• oa »- « S 



c— « a. 






>S' 



So 3 



«xj a> s ° 

« 08 £ O C 




CDO 



APPENDIX. xxxiii 

E. 

Copij of the. certificate of Governor Tompkins' account audited 2d July^ 1812. 

Governor Tompkins' account for the purchase and manufacture of ordnance, armsantJt 
ammunition was audited on the 2d Julv,1812,& he was furnished with a statement of it, 
which after setting- forth the account at length, concludes with the following certificate: 

State of New-York, } 
Comptroller's Office. § 

I have examined the preceding 1 account of his Excellency the Governor of this state 
with the vouchers accompanying it, and do hereby certify that there is a balance due 
him thereon from this stateofnine thousand four hundred and thirty-six dollars, twen- 
ty-seven cents, five mills, which balance is made payable to him in and by the seventh 
section of the act, entitled "an act further to provide for the defence of the frontiers 
and for other purposes," passed 12th June, 1812, out of any monies in the treasury 
not otherwise appropriated. And I do further certify that in addition to the sum of 
sixy-six thousand one hundred and eigkty-six dollars twenty-seven and an half cents, 
expended by him as stated in the preceding account, it appears by the vouchers afore- 
said that he lias made advances to John McLean on unsettled accounts to the amount, 
of two thousand five hundred dollars : to Isaiah and John Townsend to the amount of 
one thousand dollars; and to E. Whitney to the amount of fourteen thousand dollars ; 
for -widen he is hereafter to account. 

Albany, July 2, 1812. ARCH'D M'INTYRE, Comptroller. 

%* The $1000 above mentioned as advanced to I. and J. Townsend, was passed to 
the Governor's credit 6th March, 1818, having been shown by the Messrs. Townsends 
to be accounted for. The other advances continued suspended till August, 1819. 

F. 

Copy of a letter from Mr. Tompkins, to the Comptroller. 
Dear Sir, Staten Island, 25th September, 1818. 

Mr. Hopper informs me that there are receipts of his in your office, for which the 
accounts rendered there by him do not render detailed expenditure, I feel very cer- 
tain that he lias accounted either to Mr. Carpenter of the western district or to me 
for the monies he received, with vouchers. If they are not in your office, they are 
amongst my papers here or with those of Mr. Carpenter. In the course of the ensuing 
week I shall either go in person to Albany, or send an agent to collect the papers and 
copy the abstracts necessary tojdMnplete a statement finally, without which it cannot 
be completed here. I have ob^MB^copies of all those rendered to the United States, 
and want only copies of some abstracts in your office, of the names of the payees of 
the warrants drawn, and an examination of the Bank credits for warrants drawn, la 
the mean time I hope you will not take any measures or make any disposition of the 
rejected and suspended papers, as I shall want them to submh to the Commissioners 
with other papers here, and those procured since I saw you in the spring. Thompson 
Mead and some others, have rendered me detailed accounts and vouchers in the course 
of the summer for the sums charged to them, which will be submitted to the com- 
missioners with the other papers. The difficulty of procuring a competent account- 
ant to compare the abstracts, and to rectify any mistakes that may he made, is the 
only obstacle which has prevented my sending one to Albany for the last fortnight. I 
shall see one to-morrow in the city, and shall send him immediately to Albany, if I 
can make an arrangement with him to that effect. 

I am, Dear Sir, your obedient servant, 

Arch'd M'lntyre, Esq. DANIEL D. TOMPKINS. 

Copy of another letter from Mr. Tompkins, to the Comptroller. 
Dear Sir, Staten Island, October 20, 1818. 

I regretted not seeing you before you returned from New-York to Albany. The 
bearer, Mr. Quackenbush, calls for the purpose of procuring the copies and receiving 
the papers suspended, rejected or not carried absolutely to my credit. The copies I 
want from the books, are 

1. List of all the warrants ever drawn by me and in whose favour. 

2. A copy of the several accounts audited from the commencement of my admin- 
istration to the date of those you sent me last. I do not want the l'.ems of charge in 
detail as rendered by me, but merely a copy from your books of the account as audit* 
ed by vou. 

5 



xxxiv APPENDIX, 



/ 



3. Either the originals or copies of the several accounts of John M'Lean, Commis- 
sary, and of the receipts subjoined. I do not want the vouchers accompanying 1 his 
accounts, but only of his account rendered with each bundle of vouchers. 

4. ^11 the duplicates and vouchers in your office, placed there by me, which have 
not been carried absolutely to my credit. For all these, Mr. Quackenbush will re- 
ceipt to you in my behalf, and his receipt shall bz equally valid and obligatory upon 
me as my own. I have desired him to employ Mr. Campbell, and any other person 
in whom you have confidence, to make the copies and extracs from your's and the 
Treasurer's office, of the warrants, &c. I could wish him to return in as short time 
a£ will be practicable to obtain the papers above alluded to. 

I am, Dear Sir, vour obed't serv't. 

DANIEL D. TOMPKINS. 
Arch'd Mlntyre, Esq. Comptroller, 8cc. 



Copy of a Schedule annexed to the case .submitted by Mr. Tompkins to his counsel, 

SCHEDULE A. 
Claims of Daniel D. Tompkins, late Governor of the State of New-York, allowed and 
recommended by the Commissioners appointed by the Legislature, over and above 
§884,461 24 cents, previously audited and admitted by the Comptroller, and over 
and above §136,625 44 cents, suspended by him, viz. 
1 8 19. April 1. Interest and premium on $42,157 88 cents, being the balance audited 
and advanced by me for the public service in 1812, which was [not] 
settled or repaid till 1816, 4 years, §15,179 50 

To Commissions on $1,075,021 72, drawn, expended, and 
accounted for to the State, and for risk and responsibility 
for all officers and agents to whom the money was confided, 
expenses, journies, command, losses, &c. at 5 per cent. 53,751 98 

Interest thereon, 4 years, 15,050 52 

To Commission on $2,363,516 27 obtained from the United 
States, and upon personal loans, and advances, expended 
and accounted for, 118,175 80 

Interest on the last mentioned Commissions, 4 vears and 6 

months, to 1st July, 1819. ■ 37,225 28 

To premium and discount of $1,095,000 a*t 20 per cent, in 
stock, being the amount loaned on rj^^ersonal responsi- 
bdity, and advanced and accounted|MMr 277,506 

Interest thereon to 1st April, 1819, 4 yTO^md 3 months, 80,402 25 

Interest for 3 months on $53,751 98, on 118,175 80, and on 
§277,500, from 1st Apnl,18i9, to 1st July, 1819, 3 months, 7,864 43 



§605,155 76 
Charges and Vouchers rejected or suspended by the Commissioners, viz. 
1814.Nov.l. To o9l'8 new and superior muskets, obtained and deposited 
in the State Arsenals by D. D. Tompkins, on lus sole re- 
sponsibility, credit, and risk, and without any authority or 
credit of the State, in lieu of the same number of old and 
condemned Hamburgh and other muskets, purchased for 
the State in 1796, at 5 dollars, making a net gain to the 
Slate, o; §8 50 per musket, §5S,718 

Interest thereon, 4 years and 6 months, 18,497 47 

To the same profit and advantage on 1600 Vergennes mus- 
kets, disposed of in the same way, and on the same credit, 13,600 
Interest thereon, 3 years and 6 m >nths, 3,332 

To muskets, &.c. delivered into the State Arsenals, by D. D. 
Tompkins, for which he is accountable to theU. States, and 
for which the state has paid nothing, 307,455 

$401,602 47 

ir. 

Copy of a letter from Isaar. B.-onson, Esq. to his excellency D. D. Tompk ns. 
DkaiiS;i5, N,.w-\orr, July Si, 1819. 

I have ascertained agreeable to the request contained in your favor of the 19th, that 



APPENDIX. xxxV 

the loans made to the United States, at the latter end of the year 1814, were at the 
rate of 80 per cent. — that is, the government received tor one hundred dollars in their 
six per cent, stock, eighty dollars in current bank bills. I understand tiiat the lenders 
in most cases hypothecated or pledged to the banks, as collateral security for the loan 
of tiieir bills, the siock which they received from the Government. 

Where you borrowed ^money of the banks on your personal responsibility accom- 
panied with a pledge of public stock as collateral security, you were precisely in the 
predicament, as far as I can discover, of any other individual lender, except that you 
gamed nothing by the rise of the stock, which you were equally with them liable to 
lose by its fall. 

In cases whjre monies were so borrowed or obtained by you, the law appears to me 
to be imperative, and chat it ves. s the Comptroller with no discretion, but directs him 
to allow you the same premium on the money you so furnished as the U. S. allowed 
to those individuals or corporations from whom they borrowed money at that period. 

I have the honor to be with great respect, 
Your most obedient servant, 

His Excellency I. BRONSON. 

Daniel D. Tompkins 

I. 

Copy of a Certificate of Messrs. Prime, Ward, and Sands. 
We certify that the current price of six per cent, stock of the U.S. during the months 
of Nov. and Dec. 1814, was from 76 to 71 h per cent, for current money of the city of 
New-York. PRIME, WARD, & SANDS 

New-York, 12th April, 18! 9. 
U. S". six per cent, stock has been sold at 101 per cent, since the opening of the 
transfer books. PRIME, WARD, & SANDS. 



Copy of an act for thermal settlement of the late Governor's Accounts. 
An Act for the final settle«nt of the accounts of the late Governor of this State. 

j^ Passed April 13th, 1819. 

I. Be it enacted by the pe^fAfthe State of New-York, represented in Senate and 
Assembly, That the ComptjBki' iBghis State, be and he is hereby authorized and re- 
quired to adjust and finally ^uMmand settle the residue of the accounts of Daniel 
D. Tompkins, late governor of this state, and to credit and allow to him therein the 
same discount or premium on the current monies borrowed and obtained by the said 
Daniel D. Tompkins on his personal responsibility, and by him expended and disbursed 
in the public service during the late war, as were made and allowed to other individu- 
als and to bodies corporate, and by them received for current monies loaned to the 
government of the United States, on the certificates of stock or funded debt of the said 
government, the said Comptroller having reference in such settlement to the respect- 
ive periods at which the said current monies were so borrowed and obtained ; and that 
the said Comptroller debit tlie government of the United States -with the sum so alloiued 
to the said Daniel D. TompVins in the account of this state with the general govern- 
ment for disbursements during the late war ; and that the treasurer pay on the war- 
rant of the Comptroller the balance, if any there should be found due to the late go- 
vernor upon the final settlement of the said accounts. 

II. And be it further enacted, That the Comptroller be and he is hereby authorized 
and required to credit and allow to the said Daniel D. Tompkins, in the account all 
such sums as may satisfactorily appear to him to have been advanced, expended and 
paid by the said Daniel D. Tompkins, for and on account of any public services, and 
which were authorized by law, and to open accounts with the various individuals to 
whom any advances were ma<le by the said Daniel D. Tompkins, and allowed by the 
said Comptroller in the settlement aforesaid, and to call all such individuals to an 
account for such advances. • > ■ 

L. 

Copy of a letter from Abraham Van Vechten, Esq. to the Comptroller. 
Deah Sib, December 9th, 1S19.. 

I feel extremely reluctant Uhave my name introduced in a personal newspaper co'^ 



xxxvi APPENDIX. 

troversy, whosoever may be Hie parties to it. But lest leaving 1 your letter of the 7th 
instant unanswered, should lead to a misconstruction of my motives, I will, in reply, 
state substantially, my recollection of the matters to which you refer. The details of 
conversation which passed at the times alluded to, my memory does not enable me to 
give with precision. 

In the course of the last spring you came to my office in the evening, with a copy of 
the act which had been passed for the settlement of the late Governor's accounts with 
the state, and expressed an earnest wish to obtain my sentiments as to its construction 
in relation to the monies borrowed by the Governor to carry on the late war, on which 
he was entitled to a premium. After perusing the act, I stated to you that according to 
my information, some of the loans, though formally made upon the Governor's responsibility, 
were in fact bottomed upon pledges of Treasury notes, -which had been advanced to him by 
the United States, for the purposes of the ivar, and that it appeared to me he could have 
no just claim to a premium in such cases. You thereupon declared your satisfaction that 
I concurred in your construction of the act. We then entered into a short conversa- 
tion about the difference of opinion which existed between you and the late Governor, 
concerning the construction of the act, the particulars of which I do not recollect. It 
is very possible, that in the course of our conversation, I may have intimated to you, 
that I had suggested doubts to a friend in the senate, whether the expectations of the 
supporters of the act would be realized by it, because I entertained such doubts from a 
belief that some of the loans on -which premiums -would be claimed, -were made in the manner 
above stated. 

In the course of the summer the late Governor called upon me professionally for a 
written opinion as to the legal construction of the act, and submitted a detailed state- 
ment of facts with documents relative to the aforesaid loans (of which until then I was 
uninformed) for my consideration. On a deliberate examination of the statement and 
documents, I concurred in and subscribed the written opinion which the late Gover- 
nor has published. Not long afterwards, both you and the late Governor came to my 
office, as I understood for the purpose of obtaining explanations from me which lie 
seemed to suppose, might remove your objections^ the settlement of his accounts 
upon the principles for which he contended. After hearing your respective statements, 
I observed, that the written opinion which I had giv^was the construction of the act 
remained unaltered. While in the office, you and yflfttc Governor were a good deal 
engaged in discussing the subjects of d.rterenc^gjin^fci you, in which I may have 
participated, but my memory not having been^i.n. ^ ^pith the particulars, I am un- 
able to detail them. ^^^^ 

I am, dear sir, 

Your obedient Servant, 

Archibald Mclntyre, Esq. AB. VAN YECHTEN. 

til Ml II 

M. 

Copy of a letter from the Comptroller to Chancellor Kent. 

State of New-Youk, CoMPrnoELFii's Office. 
SIR, Albany, November. 22, 1819. 

The Vice President in his late letter addressed to-mef&sserts that He assented that 
I should apply for your opinion on the question in dispute between us. 

As he is under an utter mistake in this, and as I consider it of importance to my- 
self and to the cause of truth, to receive your answers to one or two queries in relation 
to the interview I had the honour of having had with you, in the latter part of the 
month of July last, I have to beg you will have the goodness to state, 

1. Whether I did not call on you at that time, and inform you that a difference of 
opinion existed between the Vice President and myself, as to the construction of the 
act of the last session of the Legislature, for the final settlement of his accounts, and 
whether I did not earnestly request that you would consent to decide between us ? 

2. Whether you did not on that occasion inform me, that although you would not 
then absolutely engage to decide between us, you would take the subject into consid- 
eration : and whether you did not say that if we both agreed to submit the question 
in writing you would probably decide between us ? 

It is proper I should state that if I am honored with an answer to this comimmica- 
tibnj it is my intention to give it publicity, » 



APPENDIX. xxxvii 

I pray you to pardon the freedom I have thus taken in troubling you. [Nothing but 
a sense of duty could induce me to do it. 

I have the honor to be 

With the highest respect, Sir, 

Your most obed'i serv't. 
ARCH'D. M'lNTYUE. 
The Hon. James Kent, 
Chancellor of the State of New- York. 



N. 
Copy of the Chancellor's answer. 
SIR, New York, November 29, 1819. 

I had the honor of receiving your letter of the 22d inst. and I wish it was in my power 
to recollect, with more precision, the conversation between us to which you allude. 

I remember your calling on me, and asking whether I would not consent to decide 
as to the construction of the act relative to the Vice President, about which you dis- 
agreed, and I said that I was disinclined to give any opinion or decision in the case, 
and that if I did, it would be necessary for you and the Vice President to agree, in 
writing) to submit the legal construction of the Statute to my decision. 

I am with much respect, 
Your most obed't serv't 
Abchibaxd M'Ixtybe, Esq. JAMES KENT. 



O. 

Copy of the Comptroller's report to the legislature in 1813, of Governor Tompkins' 

expenditures. 

The Comptroller in obedience to the resolution of the Honorable the Assembly of 
the 22d of the last month, reciting him to report « f a detailed account of the mo- 
" mes drawn out of the tr ej^BS ift^rtue of the further defence of the frontiers, and 
** other purposes, passed « ^Lme last, past, and of the expenditure of such 

" money, according to tnmyo^^B^R turned and filed in his office/' respectfully 
reports : m£ JpKk, 

That the following sumsKi.r heci{j&M.wn out of the treasury by his Excellency 
the Governor, in pursuance^J -a,.l ;^^J£z : 

1812, June 25th, under the ^fcf wB* #5,000 00 

July 21st, do. do. do^^ 1 * 20,000 00 



August 11th, under the 6th section, 12,500 00 

1813, February 6th, do. do. do, 12,500 00 



25,000 

25,000 

^^ 57,500 

June 25ih, under thj^^^section, 25,000 

August 17th, undei^^^Btth section, 2.Q r iG 



1812, Augtist 25th, under the 8th section 12,500 00 

September 8th, do. do. do. 25,000 00 



$1 



114,500 



ALSO, 
July 8th, under the 7th section, for payment of a balance due tiie 
governor on his account for the purchase of ordnance, arms, and 
ammunition. 25,936.27 



£141,436.27 
And that the following are statements of the various expenditures, under the differ- 
ent sections of said act, according to the accounts and vouchers exhibited by the go- 
vernor, and now on file in this office, viz. 

EXPENDITURES under the 2d section, 
For repairing, cleaning, and packing arms, &c. 5433 99 

repairing armories, &e. 116 24 

,— » 550 23' 



xxxviii APPENDIX. 

EXPENDITURES under the 3d section. 

For transportation of artillery, arms, and ammunition to 

arsenals on the frontiers, 2,506 58 

Building guard-houses at Rome, and Watertown, 763 28 
Advances to sundry persons by the governor, for which 
accounts of expenditure have not yet been rendered by 

those persons, 2,450 00 

EXPENDITURES under the 5th section. 5,719 86 

For cannon, 1,435 50 

powder, 6,043 84 
artillery carriages, ammunition waggons, harness, 
travelling forges, sponges, ramrods, powder horns, 8cc. &c. 4,805 65 

musket balls, and lead, 2,717 21 
marques, tents, and tent poles* 12,377 19 

fenapsacks, 5,400 00 

drums and fifes, 277 75 

camp kettles, 2,132 52 1-2 

surgical instruments, 179 25 

musket cartridges, 1,130 63 1-2 

canteens, 641 61 1-2 

cannister and grape shot, 575 00 

cannon ball, 1,500 81 

ensigns, &c. 429 91 

camp furniture, 85 46 

spades, pickaxes, hatchets, handsaws, nail hammers, &c. 139 23 

cooperag-e of casks, and other incidental expenses, 119 39 
Advances made by the Governor to individuals, for 

which accounts of expenditure have not been rendered, 1000 00 



EXPENDITURES unde|jji. CUi ikttion. 

For cartridge boxes, fM ■ H| H 4,107 00 

swords and belts. 3- '^ ' 968 00 

pistols, J;!*'' » jB' 5 > 272 00 

rifle pouches, M H ^j*B 36 00 
Expenses attending the purchase and tHtKymil.tA'^p 

of the articles purchased under this sOT'O, w^^ 30 88 
Advances to sundry persons by the GovCTnoiM>n 

unclosed contracts, for arms, rifles, &c. 24,750 00 



- 40,990 96 1-2 



rges 

drngi^^ 



EXPENDITURES under the 8th Section. 
For transportation of baggage, arms, and divers militia 

corps, going into service, 3,598 9' 

Provisions, liquors, groceries, blankets, charges 
for boarding, and other incidental expenses^ 
divers militia corps, 

Transportation of a number of uniform compal 
of militia to Staten Island, including board! 
and transportation of baggage, &c. 

Forage, 

Expresses, special messengers, and other expenses 
attending the conveying of orders and intelli- 
gence to and from the different parts of die fron- 
tiers, and to and from general officers, &c. 

Erection of barracks, guard houses, and repairs of 
gun carriages, arms, &c. 

Compensation for services on board vessels on he 
lakes, in transporting troops, arms, ammunition, &c. 
Fire wood and straw, 

Hospital supplies and stores, with attendance on 
tlie sick, &c. 

House rent for temporary barracks, quarters, &c. 

Pursuing and app) eliending deserters, aad for 
warning delinquents. 686 6^ 



35,163 88 



4,054 99 1-2 


2,406 35 
1,012 27 


2,237 81 


5,269 26 


1,059 23 
1,240 15 


604 72 
510 24 



APPENDIX. xxxix 

Damages sustained by David Parish, in conse- 
quence of fortifications thrown up by order 
of General Brown. 200 00 

Purchase of cannon ball picked up, and for am- 
munition, &c. taken from the enemy. 131 00 
Purchase of a boat called the Industry, and a 

bark Canoe. 503 00 

Repairing 1 drums, &c. 43 13 

Expenses of obtaining secret information from 

Canada by one of the commanding Generals. 100 00 
Wages to armourers & quarter master sergeant 122 00 
Charges attending the bringing to Albany of 
George H. M'Lean, apprehended on the north- 
ern frontier and sent to the Governor as a spy. 200 00 
Compensation to persons employed in superin- 
tending the transportation and delivery of 
arms, he. including travelling expenses. 488 41 

Special Guard ordered out at the request of the 

frontier inhabitants of Mexico. 48 63 

Incidental expenses, consisting of printing, stati- 
onary, postage, and a variety of miscellaneous 
charges. 863 15 1-2 

Advances to sundry persons by the Goyernor,for 
which accounts and vouchers of expenditure, 
have not yet been rendered by those persons. 15,858 34 

41,238 28 

EXF'ENDITURES under the- 13th Section. 
For completing the fortifications erecting under the 
authority of the state on Staten Island, includ- 
ing #8,887 71 in the hands of the commission- 
ers to superintend the erection of those fortifi- 
cations not vet accounted for. 22,806 18 
EXPENDITURES under the 14th Section. 
For erecting an arsena- at M alone, in Franklin county. 5,004 88 
erecting an ars nal in Richmond county. 2,400 29 
advances by the Governor, for which accounts of 
t expenditure have not yet been received. 2000 

9,405 17 



#155,874 56 1-2 
Besides the sums drawn by the Governor, as above stated, the following have been 
drawn in virtue of said act by the assistant Commissaries, viz. i 

%)V their salaries*, 433 86 

Pay of arsen.d guards, 2,296 r >0 

_ 2,730 36 

It is proper to observe, that the charges of expenditure are, in some cases, so blended, 
as to render it impracticable in every instance, to separate and place all under their pro~ 
per head. It hah, however, been done as accurately as the nature of the accounts and 
vouchers would admit. The advances made by the Governor on unclosed contracts 
and unsettled accounts, cannot of course be placed under any particular head at this 
time. All which >s respectfully submitted. 

ARCH'D. M'INTYRE, Comfit. 
Comptrollers Office, April 3, 1813. 

P. 

Copy of a certificate of John Ely, Jun. 
At the request of Mr. M'Intyre, the Comptroller, I certify that I have several times 
heard his Excellency Daniel D. Tompkins, late Governor of this Sate, say, that he 
feared that some of the vouchers rendered by him to the Comptroller were lost, and 
that m particular, two of them, which he named, -were missing, though it clearly appear- 
ed from the Comptroller's report to the Legislature in 1813, that they had once been 
in is (the Comptroller's) possession. One of these vouchers was for the purchase of 
eannon ball, &c. picked up on the Niagara or Sackett's Harbor frontier, and the other 



xl APPENDIX. 

was for a vessel on Lake Ontario. They are described in the above mentioned report 
as follows : 

,c Purchase of cannon ball picked up and for ammunition, &c. taken from the 

enemy, - - 7)131. 

" Purchase of a boat called the Industry, and a bark canoe, 503.'' 

The Comptroller and myself took notice, that these were missing-, when we were 
examining- Governor Tompkins' accounts in the winter of 1817 — 18, and I understood 
last spring-, that the Comptroller mentioned the circumstance to Governor Tompkins. 

I had occasion to call on the late Governor at his lodgings, on official business, just 
before he left this city in August last ; and in the course O' the conversation between 
us he alluded to these charges and inquired whether I recollected any others -which hud 
formerly been made by him to tlie State, but which were not now passed to his credit, and 
were missing. To which I replied in the negative. 

1 will add, that as I have had a great deal to do with the • lamination and arrange- 
ment of the Governor's vouchers, I am very certain that none of them have been lost, sup- 
pressed or mislaid in the Comptroller' 1 s office, and that if they had been, it could scarcely 
have happened -without my knowledge ; nor do I believe that any of them have been 
purloined from the office, bv any person belonging or not belonginer thereto. 

Albany, December 8, 1819. JOHN ELY, Jr. 



Q. 

Copy of a letter from the Co • ptroller to Ferris Pell, Esq. 

State of New- York, Cojip roller's office, 
SIR, Albany, September 15, 1819. 

Understanding that your duties will soon draw you to Washington, I have to re- 
quest that you will be so good, whilst there, as to ascertain whether the following 
charges were made by Governor Tompkins in his accounts against the United Steles, 
viz : Cannon ball picked up, and ammunition, &c. taken from the enemy, I) 131 
Boat Industry and a bark canoe. 5^3 

The first of the above will probably be composed of two or more vouchers, and the 
latter of two; and will be so charged, if charged at all, in the Vice President's ab- 
stracts ; and you will therefore please to look for items of the above description to 
make up the said sums. I cannot be more particular in my specification of the charges 
as the only document to which it is now in my power to refer, is a report made by me 
to the Assembly in April,1813, in which the items were not given id detail ; bu' the 
expenditures, stated under different heads merely. 

Circumstances have rendered it necessary that I should be informed of the above 
and I beg you will therefore favor me by making the search, and inform me of the re- 
sult as soon as your convenience will permit. 

I have the honor to be, 

Your obed't serv't. 
Ferris Pell, Esq. ARCfl'D. AI'INTYRE. 

R. 

Copy of Mr. Pell's Reply. 
SIR, New- York, October 1, 1819. 

I returned to this place yesterday. While at Washington, I attended to the request 
contained in your letter of the 15th ult. and can satisfy you in part only. 

As to the first item, your statement is too vague. You say that it is made up of 
several small sums, paid to several different persons — but you neither give the re- 
spective sums, nor the names of the persons. Until you furnish one or the other, I 
doubt if the fact can be ascertained. 

As to the second item, there is no difficulty. It is contained in abstract B. of the 
Vice President's accounts, has been allowed by the War Department, and passed to 
his credit. The entry is as follows : 

No. 306—1812 Dec. 29.— Hoel Lawrence, for boat Industry, with her tackle, &c . 
complete, D.500 00 

\\ ill you be so good as^to inform me when the claims, which you were directed by 
the last Legislature to pay, and which I am required to exhibit to the War Depart- 
ment, will be ready. This is a season of leisure at Washington, and they would now 
receive prompt attention. I am, dear sir, 

With much respect, 
Your obed't serv't. 

To Archibald IVPlNTiaiF, Esa. FERRIS PELL 



/ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



027 293 982 



? 






